The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On March 22, 2004, when the defendant's employee C operates a D truck with respect to the defendant's business, the defendant's employee, the defendant was obliged to comply with the request of the road management authority (in measuring the proper discretion) in spite of the fact that the 17th line on the national highway located in the Guro-si, in order to preserve the road's structure and prevent traffic danger, the 10 tons of gross weight, 40 tons of gross weight, 16.7 meters in length, 2.5 meters in width, and 4.0 meters in height and below 4.0 meters in height, while operating the said truck, the defendant failed to comply with the demand of the road management authority, unless there are justifiable reasons.

2. As to Article 86 and Article 83(1)3 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005), which is the applicable provisions to the facts charged in the instant case, as to Article 86 and Article 83(1)3 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005), the Constitutional Court shall, where an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)3 in Article 86 of the former Road Act, impose a fine under the relevant Article on the corporation, even if the corporation violates the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Order 2011Hun-Ga20, 211 (Joint) of December 29, 201). Thus, the part of the said Act was retroactively

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.