The defendant shall be innocent.

1. At around 19:20 on May 12, 2005, A, an employee of the Defendant, violated the restrictions on the operation of vehicles by the road management authority in relation to the Defendant’s business by loading steel bars with a height of 4.21 meters and operating a vehicle owned by the Defendant, despite the restriction on the operation of a vehicle exceeding 2.5 meters in width, 4.2 meters in height, 16.7 meters in length, 40 tons in total, or 10 tons in load, at a 32.2km entertainment business place in the direction of the outer cycle line of Seoul and its outer metropolitan area.

2. As to the facts charged in the instant case, the public prosecutor instituted a public prosecution by applying Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005), and the above court notified the summary order of KRW 300,000, which became final and conclusive.

However, after the above summary order became final and conclusive, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "where an agent, employee, or other employee of a corporation commits an offense under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the pertinent Article shall also be imposed on the corporation," in Article 86 of the above Act, violates the Constitution (Supreme Court Order 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (merged). Accordingly, the applicable provisions of the facts charged in this case, the applicable provisions of which contain an employee's offense, retroactively lose its effect.

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.