The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant’s employee loaded and operated a container at a 3-meter distance exceeding 2.5 meters in width on the road, on October 27, 1998, which is the Defendant’s vehicle, on the 1st line of the Gaeg National Road No. 1, 1998, around 18:00, in relation to the Defendant’s business.

2. The prosecutor charged a public prosecution by applying Article 86 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.

Article 86 of the former Road Act provides that "where 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 relevant Article shall also be imposed on the corporation." The Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the relevant provision shall be imposed on the corporation in violation of the Constitution (see Constitutional Court Decision 2010Hun-Ga14, Oct. 28, 2010; Constitutional Court Decision 201Hun-Ga4, Oct. 28, 2010). Accordingly, the above provision of the Act retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the proviso to Article 47

Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.