The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On August 18, 1993, around 23:47, in relation to the Defendant’s duties, the Defendant violated the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management authority by running the 2.6 tons of the 12.6 tons of the 2nd weight of the 10 tons of the 2nd weight of the 2nd weight of the 10th weight of the 2nd weight of the 2nd weight of the 2nd weight of the 2nd 10.4km

2. The prosecutor charged the facts charged in this case by applying Articles 86, 84 subparagraph 1, and 54 (1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995). The Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," in Article 86 of the same Act, that "if the agent, employee, or other worker of the corporation commits a violation under subparagraph 1 of Article 84, a fine under the relevant Article shall be imposed on the corporation," which is in violation of the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Order 2011Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 2011).

3. In conclusion, the facts charged in 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.