The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is C is D Freight driver, and the defendant is the corporation owned by the above vehicle, and C, the defendant's employee, did not comply with the request for a measurement of vehicle load in the office of inspection of vehicle load on October 21, 1993, the third line of the national highways located in the Ma-dong, Ma-dong, Ma-dong, Ma-dong, Ma-dong, without any special reason.

2. As to the above facts charged, by applying Article 86 and subparagraph 2 of Article 84 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995), a summary order of KRW 500,000 against the defendant was issued by the Seoul District Criminal Court as of December 30, 1993, and the above summary order became final and conclusive around that time, but the defendant filed a petition for review of the above summary order on May 15, 2013 on the ground that the above provision of the Act was unconstitutional.

On October 25, 2012, the decision of the Constitutional Court (2012HunGa18) rendered on the part of Article 86 of the above Act that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 subparagraph 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article." The above provision of the law was retroactively invalidated by the decision of unconstitutionality.

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.