The accused shall disclose the summary of the judgment of innocence.

1. A’s summary of the facts charged is a driver of 11 ton of the above vehicle, and the defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of trucking transport business as the owner of the above vehicle. A’s employee, when driving the above car truck on the road on March 26, 2004, National Highway No. 17, which is located at the time of net city, in order to preserve the structure of the road and prevent risks to traffic, even though the operation of the vehicle exceeds the gross weight of 40 tones, 40 tones, 10 tones, 4 tones, 2.5 meters in width, and 16.7 meters in length, in order to prevent any danger to traffic, the defendant, who is an employee, was in violation of the above provisions.

2. The facts charged in the instant case fall under Articles 86, 83(1)3, and 54(2) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005). The Constitutional Court rendered a ruling No. 201Hun-Ga20, and 21 of the said Act (amended by Act No. 2011, Dec. 29, 201; hereinafter referred to as the "Act") on the ground that if an employee, etc. of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)3 of the said Act, the said part shall be deemed unconstitutional; and the said part shall be retroactively invalidated pursuant to the proviso of Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of this decision is publicly announced under Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 58 (2) of the Criminal