The defendant is innocent.

1. The part of the defendant in the separate criminal facts in the indictment of this case (retailing the suspect as the defendant) is the same as the defendant.

2. Determination:

A. Attached Form 207 High Court Order 21424 dated July 26, 2012 (amended by Act No. 8124, Dec. 28, 2006; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; Act No. 8976, Mar. 21, 2008; if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 83 (1) 3 in connection with the corporation’s business, a fine under the relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation; however, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality as to the above Article 86 of the former Road Act, based on the decision of unconstitutionality as to the above Article 86 of the former Road Act, retroactively lost its effect.

B. The prosecutor of the remaining cases except the above case was prosecuted by applying Article 86 and Article 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 former Road Act") or Article 86 and Article 83 (1) 2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005; hereinafter "the former Road Act") and Article 86 and Article 83 (1) 2 of the former Road Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8976 of Mar. 21, 2008; hereinafter "the latter part of Article 201Hun-Ga14, 271, 35, 384, 208 and 788 of the former Road Act). However, the latter part of the Act's Article 86-1 of the former Road Act's unconstitutional.

3. Accordingly, the above facts charged constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, the Criminal Procedure Act.