The defendant shall be innocent.

The defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of trucking transport business, etc., and the defendant's employee Gap, with respect to the defendant's business, operated the cargo of 11.03t of B vehicle 1.03t of B vehicle at the 163.38km point in the Busan Sea Line, Busan, Busan, on December 9, 2007, with respect to the defendant's business.

Judgment

With respect to the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecutor instituted a public prosecution by applying Articles 86, 83(1)2 and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; and this court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial by recognizing the guilty guilty of the facts charged based on each of the

However, after the decision for a retrial becomes final and conclusive, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the pertinent Article shall also be imposed on the corporation (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Order 2008HunGa17, Jul. 30, 2009)." Thus, according to the above decision for a unconstitutionality, the provision of the above Act, which applies mutatis mutandis to the facts charged, retroactively loses its effect.

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