The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a corporation established for the purpose of general cargo transport business, and at around 10:20 on May 6, 2005, A, an employee of the defendant, loaded his co-days on B in relation to the defendant's business at the control station of the 12.3 tons, 3 stable 12.5 tons, 12.4 tons, 13.4 tons, 5 stable 14.1 tons, and gross weight of 59.0 tons, and loaded more than 2.3 tons, 2.3 tons, 2.5 tons, 3.4 tons, 4.1 tons, and 19.0 tons with gross weight of more than 59.0 tons.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86, 83(1)2, and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005) with respect to the facts charged in the instant case, and the prosecutor prosecuted the facts charged by applying Articles 86, 83(1)2, and 54(1) of the former Road Act, and the court rendered the judgment subject to the judgment,

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 2010HunGa38, Oct. 28, 2010)." Thus, according to the above decision for a unconstitutionality, the provision of the above Act, which is the applicable provisions of 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.