The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. On January 14, 2003, at around 06:28, the Defendant violated the restriction on the operation of the management agency by operating the truck as loaded with freight of 12.0t on the 5 livestock, exceeding 10 km from the 16 km point in the direction of the Sindo Highway, along with the 16 km truck.

2. As to the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecutor charged a public prosecution 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; hereinafter the same), and the summary order subject to retrial was notified and finalized.

However, after a summary order subject to review becomes final and conclusive, the part of Article 86 of the former Road Act that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the relevant Article 83 (1) 2 shall also be punished by the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (combined) of the same Act) is in violation of the Constitution. Therefore, the aforementioned provision of the Act, which is a applicable provision of the facts charged, retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso to Article 47 (2) of the former Constitutional Court Act (Amended by Act No. 12597, May 20, 2014).

3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, a judgment of innocence is rendered in accordance with the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and a summary of the judgment of the defendant is announced in accordance with Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure Act.