logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.05.22 2019노6085
관세법위반
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant purchased and exported original by-products corresponding to wastes, and thus exported the wastes, and the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, inasmuch as it did not report the export of goods different from the goods of the instant case, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or

2. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the representative of an individual business chain who engages in the export and wholesale business of livestock products in the Masan-si B and C, Ansan-si.

If the name, standard, quantity, price, etc. of the relevant goods is intended to be exported, such declaration shall be filed with the head of the relevant customs office, and no goods different from those on which such declaration is filed shall be exported.

Nevertheless, on June 5, 2014, the Defendant filed an export declaration that he/she exported freezing waste (waste) to Thailand, but actually exported 24,000 kgs from that time to October 27, 2017, from that time, the Defendant exported 1,139,020 ggs of frozen originals, such as freezing, ducks, and ducks, for a total of 47 times as indicated in the attached list of crimes, from that time, up to October 27, 2017, he/she exported 1,139,020 ggs of frozen originals (a total of KRW 1,474,452,031, hereinafter “instant export goods”).

As a result, the Defendant reported goods different from the relevant export goods, and exported freezing goods, etc., respectively.

3. The judgment of the court below also asserted the same purport as the above reasons for appeal, and as to this, the court below judged that the export goods of this case do not constitute wastes for the following reasons, and convicted the above facts charged.

In other words, the defendant's exported goods are not subject to a quarantine certificate, but can not be distributed for food in the Republic of Korea.

arrow