The defendant shall be innocent.

1. At around 23:20 on October 28, 2006, B, an employee of the Defendant, was found to have measured the loaded freight of C vehicle at the Cheongan National Road No. 1 National Road No. 1 in the Cheongan-gun National Road No. Cheongan-gun National Road Co., Ltd. on October 28, 2006, and the width of C vehicle exceeds 1.45m more than 2.5m more than 2.5m more than that of restriction on operation, and thus violated the Road Operation Restriction Regulations.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86, 83, and 54(1) of the former Road Act to institute a public action against the above charged facts. However, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of an individual commits an offense provided for in Article 83(1)2 in connection with his/her individual's business, then the individual shall be punished by a fine provided for in the relevant Article." (Supreme Court Order 2008HunGa17 Decided July 30, 2009; Constitutional Court Order 2010HunGa14 Decided October 28, 2010; Supreme Court Order 201HunGa24 Decided December 29, 2011) that "if the individual's agent, employee, or other worker commits an offense under Article 83(1)2, the individual shall be punished by a fine provided for in the relevant Article."

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.