The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant is the owner of A truck, and around October 1, 1996, around October 13:37, 1996, the Defendant, who is an employee of the Defendant, violated the restriction on the operation of the vehicle by the road management authority by operating the said truck with a limited weight exceeding 10 tons on the roads before the Daejeon Highway Business Office.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Article 86 and Article 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 facts charged, and the court issued a summary order of KRW 70,00 to the defendant as of December 96, 1996 and issued a fine of KRW 1423, Dec. 20, 1996. The above summary order was notified to the defendant around that time, but the defendant filed a request 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, a fine under the corresponding Article shall also be imposed on the corporation." On the part of Article 86 of the above Act, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the above provision of the law shall be unconstitutional. In accordance with the decision of unconstitutionality, the above provision of the law shall retroactively lose its effect.

3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, it is so decided as per Disposition by the judgment of not guilty against the defendant under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.