The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On December 28, 1994, the driver belonging to the defendant violated the restriction on the operation of over-loading at around 16:04 on the summary of the charges.

2. The prosecutor charged a public prosecution by applying Articles 86, 84 subparag. 1 and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993 and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995; hereinafter the same) to the facts charged.

However, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that Article 86 of the former Road Act provides that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense under Article 84 (1) in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the relevant Article," the part of the same shall be punished by the Constitution (see Constitutional Court en banc Decision 2011Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 201); thereby, the above provision of the Act becomes retroactively null and void.

3. According to the conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the former part of Article 32