The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged was that the Defendant had his employee B drive the C Truck on June 23, 1993, and B violated the restrictions on the operation of the vehicles of the Road Management Agency by driving the 11.5 tons of cargo loaded on the 3 niven of the 11.1 ton of the 11.1 ton of the 3 niven of the Highway at around 04:38 on June 23, 1993.

2. As to the facts charged in the instant case, the public prosecutor filed a claim for a summary order by applying Articles 86 and 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; hereinafter the same), and the defendant was notified of the summary order subject to retrial and confirmed.

In this regard, the Constitutional Court on December 29, 201 shall, where an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 (1) of the former Road Act in relation to the business of the corporation, also be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article.

“The Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the part is in violation of the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Order 2011Hun-Ga24) and thereby, the said provision was retroactively invalidated in accordance with the proviso of Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.