The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. On November 3, 1996, at the point of five km from the 16:47m of the Defendant’s employee, the Defendant violated the Defendant’s vehicle operation restriction by loading and operating the freight of 11.3t on the 1st axis of the above vehicle in excess of 10t of the Defendant’s duty.

2. The prosecutor brought a public prosecution against the above charged facts 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) to the above charged facts.

On February 18, 1997, the court issued a summary order of KRW 300,00 to the defendant as a fine of KRW 1155,00,00. The above summary order became final and conclusive after being notified to the defendant at that time, but the defendant filed a petition for review of the above summary order on the ground that there was a decision of unconstitutionality as to the above legal provision.

On October 28, 2010, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under 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," in Article 86 of the above Act, that the provision of the above Act has retroactively lost its effect in accordance with the decision of unconstitutionality.

3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment in this case is publicly announced under Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 58(2) of the Criminal