The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On October 17, 1996, around 03:17, 1996, the Defendant is the owner of a vehicle A, and the Defendant’s employee B violated the restrictions on the operation of the road management authority by operating the vehicle with the 11.5 tons of more than 10 tons of the restricted axis at the front of the North Daegu Daegu Business Office, the Korea Highway Corporation, in excess of 10 tons of the restricted axis, and the 11.3 tons of the cargo loaded at the 4 livestock.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment 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) to the above facts charged, and the court issued a summary order of KRW 50,00 to the defendant on Nov. 17, 1997 and issued a fine of KRW 13108. The above summary order became final and conclusive after notification to the defendant at that time, but the defendant filed a request for review of the above final summary order on the ground that the above legal provision was unconstitutional.

On October 28, 2010, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if 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, a fine under the corresponding Article shall also be imposed on the corporation." On the part of Article 86 of the above Act, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the above provision of the law shall be unconstitutional. In accordance with the decision of unconstitutionality, the above provision of the law shall retroactively lose its effect.

3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, it is so decided as per Disposition by the judgment of not guilty against the defendant under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.