The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On January 29, 1994, around 14:29, around 15:29, the Defendant’s employee, who is an employee of the Defendant, violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority, by operating the freight of 11.2 tons and 11.3 tons on the two dunes of the above dunes, in violation of the restriction on the vehicle’s operation of the Defendant’s vehicle at a point of 159 km in the south-nam metropolitan business office.

2. The prosecutor charged the above charged facts by applying Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995) to the indictment.

On December 29, 2011, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an act of violating the provisions of Article 84 (1) of the former Road Act in connection with the business of the corporation, the portion of the Article 86 of the former Road Act that "if the agent, employee or other worker of the corporation commits an act of violating the provisions of Article 84 (2) of the same Act, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the relevant provisions shall also be punished by the Constitution." In accordance with the proviso of Article 47

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