The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Around June 13, 2003, around 17:33, 200, the Defendant violated the restriction on vehicle operation by operating D freight vehicles in a state exceeding a total of 1.7 tons, including 11.35t, 4:10.42t, in relation to the Defendant’s duties, even though the 17th line of the national highway 17, which is the national highway located in Malai, in order to preserve the road’s structure and prevent traffic danger, C, which is an employee of the Defendant, violated the restriction on vehicle operation by operating D freight vehicles in a state exceeding a total of 1.7 tons of 3:1.35t, 4:10.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Articles 86 and 83(1)2 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995 and amended by Act No. 78326 of Dec. 30, 2005) to the facts charged in the instant case.

However, in Article 86 of the above Act, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits an offense pursuant to Article 83 (1) 2 in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine pursuant to the corresponding Article." (The Constitutional Court Order 2010Hun-Ga14, 15, 21, 27, 35, 38, 44, 70 (combined) dated October 28, 2010) is in violation of the Constitution."

Accordingly, the above provision of the law was retroactively invalidated in accordance with Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act.

3. In 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 325 of the