The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On December 5, 1993, at around 13:15 on December 13:15, 1993, the Defendant, as the owner of A truck, violated the restriction on the operation of a vehicle by a road management authority by operating the said truck with a restricted weight exceeding 12 tons in 2 ton, and 12 ton in 3 ton of 12 ton of 12 ton of 15 ton of 12 ton of 12 ton of 3 ton of 13 ton of 12 ton of 1

2. The prosecutor charged the above charged facts by applying Article 86 and Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995), and this court issued a summary order of KRW 200,000 to the defendant as of May 28, 1994. The above summary order was finalized after the notification to the defendant, but the defendant filed a request for review of the above summary order on the ground that the above provision was unconstitutional.

On the other hand, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 (1) in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the corresponding Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the 201Hun-Ga24 dated December 29, 201 should be in violation of the Constitution. In accordance with the above decision of unconstitutionality, the above provision of the law has retroactively lost its effect.

3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, it is so decided as per Disposition by the judgment of not guilty against the defendant under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.