본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.12.18 2014노2854

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.


1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant was unaware of all the circumstances that tobacco sold by the Defendant was “customs clearance through simplified import declarations,” and thus lack of objective proof, and lack of the basis for calculating the surcharge, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and ordering the additional collection of KRW 1,727,09,100, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the suspended sentence of two years in February of one year and two million won in fine, confiscation, confiscation, 1,727,09, 100 won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the trial court. ① The defendant continued to be suspected in the prosecutor's investigation process over several occasions, and in particular, during the third examination of the prosecutor's office, the defendant led to confession under the assistance of the counsel, and there is no reason to suspect the voluntariness and there is sufficient evidence to support the confession. ② The defendant stated to the effect that the above duty-free tobacco was known as commercial goods brought into the Republic of Korea through the prosecutor (each protocol of examination of the above L, etc. which the defendant submitted to the court below for a legitimate investigation) and ③ The defendant was given an opportunity from the investigative agency to consider non-violation of the Customs Act or the Tobacco Business Act among the facts charged in this case. In particular, the defendant specified parts of the charges unrelated to the tobacco and deleted considerable parts of the charges through the prosecutor's amendment of the indictment, and the defendant, as well as the defendant was related to the above violation of the Customs Act.