The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the owner of A truck and B, who is the defendant's employee, is operating the above truck in relation to the defendant's business.

A. On August 6, 1993, around 20:15, at a point 423.5 km in front of the Busan Expressway, the Korea Highway Corporation runs a cargo of at least 11.5 tons exceeding the traffic restriction standard on the second axis of the above vehicle, thereby violating the vehicle operation restriction of the road management authority;

B. On September 11, 1993, around 00:14, 1993, the Korea Highway Corporation located 20.4 km in front of the Seoul Highway Corporation's business office, which violated the restriction on vehicle operation by loading and operating 11.1 ton of freight exceeding the restriction on vehicle traffic on the second axis of the above vehicle.

2. The public prosecutor instituted a public prosecution against the facts charged of this case by applying Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545, Mar. 10, 1993; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995; Act No. 4920, Jan. 5, 1995) that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 84 (1) with respect to the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article." Accordingly, the defendant was notified of a summary order subject to reexamination and the above summary order against the defendant

However, on December 29, 2011, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality as to the above legal provision (the Constitutional Court Order 201HunGa24 Decided December 29, 201). Accordingly, the above legal provision was retroactively invalidated in accordance with the proviso of Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

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.