The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On February 11, 2003, at around 11:53, the summary of the facts charged, A, an employee of the defendant, violated the vehicle operation restrictions of the road management authority by operating B-Vehicles in the status of 13.4 tons of 4 livestock, 13.4 tons of 4 livestock, 14 tons of 5 livestock, in excess of 10 tons of 10 tons of 13.4 tons of 5 livestocks in front of the

2. The prosecutor brought a public action against the facts charged in the instant case by applying 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”). However, the part that “where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)2 of the former Road Act due to the decision of the Constitutional Court on Oct. 28, 2010, Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 1014, Oct. 14, 2010; 15, 215, 27, 35, 38, 44, and 70 of the same Act, the portion that “if the corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)2 of the same Act, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the relevant Article” becomes retroactively null and void.

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.