The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the employee of the defendant violated the restrictions on the operation of vehicles on the roads prior to the inspection station in front of the control of the vehicle in front of the check-up station at the time of making a light on July 19, 194 at around 18:55 of the 1994 in relation to

In this regard, the Constitutional Court shall impose a fine under Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995), which is a legal provision applicable to the facts charged of this case, if an agent, employee, or other worker of a legal entity commits a violation under Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the said Article in connection with the business of the legal entity.

Article 47(2) proviso of the Constitutional Court Act provides that “The part of the instant penal provision was unconstitutional (Supreme Court Decision 2011Hun-Ga24 Decided December 29, 201), and accordingly, the penal provision of the instant case, the content of which constitutes a violation of the Constitution, was retroactively invalidated pursuant to the proviso to Article 47(2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

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