The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On March 2, 2006, at around 16:30 on March 2, 2006, the Defendant: (a) as the owner of a freight truck; and (b) as an employee of the Defendant, as to his duties, violated the restriction on vehicle operation of the road management authority by operating the freight of 4.21m height on the said truck as loaded with the freight of 4.21m height exceeding 4m.

2. As to the facts charged in this case, the public prosecutor filed a public prosecution by applying Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005 and amended by Act No. 8976 of Mar. 21, 2008) to the facts charged in this case.

However, Article 86 of the above Act provides that "if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits an act of violating Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article." The Constitutional Court Order 2008Hun-Ga17 dated July 30, 2009, retroactively lost its effect.

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.