The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Around 12:26 on February 19, 2004, at around 2:12:26, the summary of the facts charged, C, an employee of the Defendant, violated the road management authority’s restriction on vehicle operation by operating a D freight vehicle with a capacity of more than 11.1 ton of 10 tons at the front of the business office of the Korea Highway Corporation, which is the second Highway.

2. The prosecutor brought a public action against the facts charged in the instant case by applying 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. 7832 of Dec. 30, 2005; hereinafter “former Road Act”). However, the part that “where an agent, employee, or other worker of a corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)2 of the former Road Act due to the decision of the Constitutional Court on Oct. 28, 2010, Article 86 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 1014, Oct. 14, 2010; 15, 215, 27, 35, 38, 44, and 70 of the same Act, the portion that “if the corporation commits a violation under Article 83(1)2 of the same Act, the corporation shall also be punished by a fine under the relevant Article.”

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