The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On December 8, 2006, at least 09:01, the Defendant, an employee of the Defendant, at the front of the 24.4 km branch office of Youngdong Highway, operated the said vehicle in the condition that the Defendant loaded the 11.16 tons of cargo on the 2 axis in excess of 10 tons of the limited storage, and violated the road management authority’s restriction on vehicle operation.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86, 83(1)2, and 54(1) of the former Road Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; hereinafter the same) to the facts charged in the instant case, and subsequently ordered a summary order of KRW 500,000, which is subject to a new trial as of March 2, 2007, and confirmed around that time.

On July 30, 2009, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee, or other servant of a corporation commits an offence under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the fine provided for in Article 83 (1) 2 shall also be imposed on the corporation" (see Constitutional Court Order 2008HunGa17, July 30, 200), which applies to this case, the provision of the Act retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

On the other hand, where the penal law or the legal provision becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent provisions shall be deemed to be a crime.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do9037, Apr. 15, 2005; 91Do2825, May 8, 1992). Thus, the facts charged in this case constitutes a case where the facts charged in this case is not a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.