도로법위반
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. The summary of the facts charged is that at around 14:52 on June 10, 1999, A, an employee of the Defendant, operated the said vehicle while loaded with each of the cargo of 11.39t and 11.64t exceeding the 10t weight of 10t in the third axis of B’s truck at an inspection station in the 17th National Highway, the Seoul National Road No. 17, the Seoul National Highway No. 17, an employee of the Defendant, in relation to the Defendant’s duties, in violation of the restriction on vehicle operation by the road management authority.
2. The prosecutor brought a public prosecution against the above charged facts by applying Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995 and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005) to the above charged facts.
However, in Article 86 of the above Act, the phrase "if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an act of violating Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be fined in accordance with the corresponding Article." The Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga38 dated October 28, 2010, retroactively lost its effect.
3. According to the conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment in this case is publicly announced pursuant to Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 5