The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the owner of A truck, B who is the Defendant’s employee, was loaded and operated at the Korea Highway Corporation’s military business office on June 8, 2006 and operated 12.275 tons, thereby violating the regulations governing vehicles subject to restriction on operation.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832, Dec. 30, 2005; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; the court issued a summary order of KRW 50,000 to the defendant as of August 9, 2006; the summary order was notified to the defendant around that time; however, the summary order became final and conclusive after that time; the defendant filed a request for review of the summary order for which became final and conclusive on the ground that the above legal provision was unconstitutional.

On the other hand, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an act in violation of Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the corporation's business, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article, as well as the corporation's business," the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the 2008HunGa17 dated July 30, 209 ruled that the above provision of the law shall be retroactively null and void.

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.