The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows: A, an employee of the Defendant, operated B vehicle at the control station of the vehicle located in Sinsan-si on October 8, 2007 at around 4.10 meters in width and 24.00 meters in length of the vehicle and violated the vehicle operation restriction of the road management authority; (2) around 16:30 on August 29, 2007, at the control station of the vehicle located in Sinsan-gun-gun, Sungsung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Seoul-gun, for the purpose of 2:45t, 17.45t, 17.85t, 4 weight and 17.85t, 4 weight and 12.30t, 5 weight and 5.80t, and 67.15t total weight and 67.15t of the vehicle; and (3) the Defendant refused to comply with the demand for the measurement of the above vehicle at around 19:36, 207.

On the other hand, the prosecutor, applying Article 100(1), Article 98(1)2, Article 58(5), Article 59(1), and Article 59(4) of the Road Act to the facts charged in this case, was prosecuted, and the summary order of KRW 300,000 was notified and finalized in this court.

However, Articles 86, 83(1)2 and 3, and 54(1) and (4) of the former Road Act (wholly amended by Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008) should have been applied to the facts charged of this case. After the above summary order became final and conclusive, "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)2 in relation to the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," in Article 86 of the above Act, "where the agent, employee, or other worker of the corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)3 in relation to the business of the corporation, the relevant penalty shall also be imposed on the corporation."