The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Around September 6, 1994, the summary of the facts charged charged, around 02:43, the Defendant, an employee of the Defendant, loaded and operated grain of 14.15 tons at the 2 axis and 14.3 tons at the 3 axis of the said 2 axis, in front of the 11st ton truck owned by the Defendant in front of the 11st ton of the 10 ton of the 10 ton of the 10 ton of the 10 ton of the 2 axis, which is the criteria for restriction on operation, in connection with the Defendant’s work.

2. As to the facts charged of this case, the prosecutor of the judgment shall, in case where an agent, employee, or other worker of the corporation commits a violation under Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995), be punished by a fine under the corresponding provision of Article 86.

A public prosecution was instituted by applying the part " "."

Accordingly, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on December 29, 201 as to the above provision of the law (Supreme Court Decision 201Hun-Ga24 Decided December 29, 201). Accordingly, the above provision of the law 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, is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.