beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. As to the facts charged, the Defendant had employees commit the following offenses. A.
A on September 14, 200, around 200 20:08, at the point 4 km from the Ulsan Metropolitan City Highway Corporation (the direction of the Dogyang), loaded cargo exceeding 10 tons of B 19.5 tons of the limited axiss of freight trucks with 1.3 tons.
B. A around October 31, 200, around 22:53, 200, loaded and operated cargo exceeding 10 tons of the limited storage of the truck at the same place as above, contrary to the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority.
C. C around March 15, 2001, around 00:11, 200, at the Korea Highway Corporation located in Yangsan City, operated the said truck with freight exceeding 11.9 tons of 11.9 tons in the third axis, while loaded with freight exceeding 10 tons in front of the water shop of the Korea Highway Corporation located in Yangsan-si, and violated the restriction on vehicle operation by the road management authority.
E around 20:00 on September 26, 2002, around 20:0, in the front line of the business office of the 26.9km-ro, Seoul and the outer circulation road, in violation of the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority by operating the F Truck with limited weight exceeding 10 tons.6 tons.
E. On July 24, 2004, G around 08:02, at the center of the Sungnam Business, a point of 5.1km in the old direction outside Seoul, G violated the restriction on the vehicle operation of the road management authority by operating the said truck with a load of more than 11.1 tons exceeding 10 tons of the restricted livestock, on the street of the Sungnam Business Office, which is a point of 5.1km in the old direction.
2. The provision of the former Road Act, which applied to each of the above facts charged, was retroactively invalidated by the Constitutional Court that rendered a decision of unconstitutionality.
Therefore, since each of the above facts charged constitutes a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.