The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On June 26, 2007, the Defendant: (a) around 11:56, the Defendant violated the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management authority by loading more than 0.2 meters in excess of 4.2 meters and exceeding 0.01 meters from the height restriction on the vehicle B at the port of unification of the 60.5 kilometers in the direction of the extension direction at an outgoing cycle road of 60.5 kilometers; (b)

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86, 83(1)2, and 54(1) of the former Road Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; hereinafter the same) to the facts charged in the instant case, and subsequently, the court issued a summary order of KRW 200,000 as of October 23, 2007, which is subject to a fine of KRW 200,000, and became final and conclusive around that time.

On October 28, 2010, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "where an agent, employee, or other servant of a corporation commits an offence under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation" (see Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga38, Oct. 28, 2010) that applied to this case, the provision of the Act retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

On the other hand, where the penal law or the legal provision becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent provisions shall be deemed to be a crime.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do9037, Apr. 15, 2005; 91Do2825, May 8, 1992). Thus, the facts charged in this case constitutes a case where the facts charged in this case is not a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.