도로법위반
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. The defendant against the defendant is a juristic person established for the purpose of mid-term leasing business, etc., and around October 27, 1994, around 08:36, the second place of business located on an expressway, the second place of business located at a point of 13.6 km away on the expressway, which is the second place of business, violated the defendant's duties by loading and operating more than 11.7 tons of the B truck on the third axis of the truck, in excess of 10 tons of the limited axis.
2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86, 84 subparagraph 1, and 54 (1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993 and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995; hereinafter the same) to a summary order against the defendant, and the summary order subject to review was issued and confirmed as is.
Article 86 of the former Road Act, which applies to the defendant on December 29, 2011 by Supreme Court Decision 2011HunGa24 Decided December 29, 201, provides that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 (1) in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under Article 84 (2)." Accordingly, the provision of the above Act retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.
On the other hand, where the penal law or the legal provision becomes retroactively effective due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent provision shall be deemed to constitute a crime.
(2) Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “The charges of this case against the defendant shall not be charged as a crime” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do9037, Apr. 15, 2005). Thus, since the facts charged against the defendant constitute a crime, the defendant shall be acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure