The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On October 10, 2003, around 01:16 October 10, 2003, A, an employee of the Defendant, violated the Defendant’s vehicle operation restriction by the road management authority by operating the Defendant’s vehicle as loaded with freight exceeding 4.21 meters at an entertainment business establishment located in the direction of the 32.2 kilometers of the Tractic Track Line 32.2 kilometers.

2. As to the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecutor charged a public prosecution 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 the same), and the summary order subject to reexamination was notified and finalized.

However, after the above summary order became final and conclusive, 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, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the relevant Article," in Article 86 of the former Road Act (the Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga38, Oct. 28, 2010) that the provision of the above Act, which is the applicable provisions of the facts charged, retroactively lost its effect.

3. In conclusion, 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.