The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the owner of a freight truck A1 ton.

On January 26, 200, around 19:55 on January 26, 200, B, an employee of the defendant, loaded one container stuff with a width of more than 3 meters from the 1st on the national highway located in the celish, and operated more than 2.5 meters wide.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86, 83(1)2 and 54(1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995, and amended by Act No. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005; hereinafter the same) to the above charged facts.

On October 28, 2010, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee, or other employee of a corporation commits an offence under Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the relevant Article" in Article 86 of the former Road Act, which applies to this case, violates the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70, which is October 28, 2010). Accordingly, the above provision of the Act retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso of Article 47 (2) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Thus, the above facts charged constitute a crime, and thus, is not guilty under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.