The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged was that the Defendant had C, an employee of the Defendant, drive the D Freight, and C, around July 6, 2005, violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority by operating the 11.39t freight exceeding 10t of the 406km limit from the 12:28 light-line 12:38 light-line 12:28 light-line 28 light-line 406km from the side of the Seoul metropolitan office.

2. The prosecutor applied 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) to the facts charged in the instant case, and the summary order subject to retrial was notified and finalized.

On October 28, 2010, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offence under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be fined under the relevant Article." (The Constitutional Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (merged)" in Article 86 of the former Road Act is in violation of the Constitution. Accordingly, the above provision of the Act retroactively lost its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, a judgment of not guilty under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act