The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant is the owner of a vehicle A, and around September 18:45, 1993, the Defendant, who is the employee of the Defendant, operated the said vehicle while loaded with the cargo of 10.6 tons exceeding 0.6 tons over 0.6 tons and 1.9 tons over 3 1.9 tons at the Osan Industrial Complex, although he could not operate more than 10 tons at the Osan Industrial Complex.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Article 86 and Article 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995) to the above facts charged, and the court issued a summary order of KRW 200,00 to the defendant as of Jan. 20, 1994. The above summary order was finalized after notification to the defendant at that time, but the defendant filed a request for review of the above summary order on the ground that there was a decision of unconstitutionality as to the above legal provision.

On December 29, 2011, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense 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." The Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the above provision of the law was against the Constitution in Article 86 (1) 24 of the above Act. In accordance with the decision of unconstitutionality, the above provision of the law was retroactively invalidated.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by deciding not guilty of the defendant under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure