The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged [2015 Height 1087] The defendant had an employee A drive B truck with respect to his/her duties. A around August 18, 2006, around 20:52, around 18, 2006, the defendant violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority by operating the freight of 4.21 meters high at the location of the 332.5 kilometers located at the Busan-do Don-ri Busan-do Office located at the 332.5 kilometers.

[2015 Highest 1491] The Defendant had C, an employee of the Defendant, drive D 15t Cargos, and C, around June 1, 2006, violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle of the road management authority by driving the freight loaded with the freight of 11.215t and the limited weight exceeding 40t at 10 kilometers from the 10-meter radius of the New Highway at the 19:06 East-dong Highway.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005, and wholly amended by Act No. 8976 of Mar. 21, 2008; hereinafter the same) to each of the facts charged in the instant case, and applied Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the same Act, and the defendant was notified of the summary order subject to review and confirmed.

On July 30, 2009, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision (the Constitutional Court Order 2008HunGa17) that "if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an act in violation of Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be fined in accordance with Article 83 (2) of the former Road Act," and thereby, the above provision of the Act retroactively lost its effect in accordance with the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, a judgment of not guilty under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act