The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On June 22, 199, A, an employee of the Defendant, committed a violation of the Defendant’s duties by carrying freight in the shape of 11.27 tons exceeding 10 tons of the limitation 10 tons of the limitation walk, at the inspection station in the Guncheon-si, document No. 17 of the National Highway at the 16:47 on June 22, 199, and operating B-vehicles, thereby violating the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management agency.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86 and 83(1)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, hereinafter “former Road Act”) to the facts charged in the instant case, and applied Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act, and accordingly, the summary order subject to reexamination was notified to the Defendant and confirmed.

However, after the above summary order became final and conclusive, Article 86 of the former Road Act provides that "where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the corporation's business, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article in the case of the corporation," the part of the Constitutional Court's decision that "if the corporation's agent, employee or other worker commits an offense under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the corporation's business, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article in the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga14, 2010Hun

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

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.