The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Around 13:58 on December 10, 2001, the summary of the charge is as follows: (a) the Defendant, an employee of the Defendant, was in violation of the restriction on the operation of vehicles by loading and operating freight of more than 10 tons out of the limited storage tons of the 3 stable 11.5 tons, 4 stable 12.0 tons, which is the restriction criteria, on the Defendant’s business at the business office in the direction-setting 26.9km at the location of the 26.9km line.

2. The public prosecutor instituted a public prosecution against the above facts charged by applying Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005) that "if an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83 (1) 2 with respect to the business of the corporation, the corporation shall be punished by a fine under the corresponding Article." Accordingly, the summary order subject to review against the defendant issued by the court became final and conclusive.

However, on October 28, 2010, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality as to the above provision of the law (the Constitutional Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (merger) on October 28, 2010), thereby retroactively invalidated the above provision of the law in accordance with the proviso of Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, the facts charged constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.