The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the owner of A15 tons dump truck, and the defendant's employee B, on August 24, 1993, operated the dump truck in the direction of a new sump truck in the shape of 11.75 tons of the soil, even though the operation of a vehicle, which is at least 10 tons of a 10 ton of a dump truck, is restricted at the Regulation Inspection Station of Vehicles located in the Gyeong-gu Daejeon-gu Daejeon Special Metropolitan City on August 24, 1993.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment applied Article 86, Article 84 subparagraph 1, and Article 54 (1) of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 4545 of Mar. 10, 1993, and amended by Act No. 4920 of Jan. 5, 1995) to the facts charged of this case. The summary order subject to retrial was issued on Dec. 18, 1993, and the summary order subject to retrial became final and conclusive around that time.

However, on December 29, 2011, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that "if an agent, employee, or other servant of a corporation commits an offence under Article 84 subparagraph 1 of the former Road Act in connection with the business of the corporation, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the relevant Article." (see, e.g., Constitutional Court en banc Order 2011Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 201) is in violation of the Constitution (see, e.g., Constitutional Court en banc Order 201Hun-Ga24, Dec. 29, 20

On the other hand, where the penal law or legal provision becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent provision shall be deemed to constitute a crime.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do9037, Apr. 15, 2005; 91Do2825, May 8, 1992). Therefore, the instant facts charged constitute a crime, and thus, is not guilty pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.