On September 29, 2020, the defendant filed a request for retrial on September 29, 2020, this court rendered a decision to commence retrial on October 19, 2020 on the ground that there was a ground for retrial under Article 47(4) and (3) of the Constitutional Court Act in a summary order subject to retrial. The decision to commence retrial became final and conclusive around that time

2. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, who is an employee, should give considerable attention and supervision to prevent the excessive operation of the Defendant’s business when operating the C Truck, and as such, neglected to do so on December 5, 1997, the Defendant, at around 13:50 on December 13:5, 1997, operated the said C Truck with freight of 13.1 ton on the third axis of the said vehicle, even though the said D cannot be operated in excess of 10 ton on the street in front of the temporary task of the Gyeonggi-Seng-gun Industrial Complex and the temporary task of the

3. Where the Acts and subordinate statutes on punishment have retroactively lost its validity due to the decision of unconstitutionality by the Constitutional Court, a prosecuted case against which a public prosecution was instituted by applying the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be pronounced not guilty under Article 325

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2010Do5986, Dec. 16, 2010). When an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84 in Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995) on December 29, 201, when the Constitutional Court committed a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84 in connection with the business of the corporation, the relevant provision shall also apply to the corporation.