The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who operated a “F” that sells master knife, etc. in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the Defendant A is the representative of (ju)G that conducts advertising and marketing as an agent, and H is a person who is not a master of D.

Any person who intends to import goods shall file a report thereon with the head of a customs office on the goods, size, quantity and other matters prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Defendant

A, in collusion with D, H, I, and J on February 25, 2015, from the customs prosecutor of the first floor customs office of Incheon International Airport Passenger Terminal 271 located at the Jung-gu Incheon Airport on the following occasions: (a) enter the Incheon International Airport from the Incheon International Airport to the Incheon International Airport; (b) enter the Incheon International Airport at the Incheon International Airport to the Incheon International Airport; and (c) entered the Republic of Korea at the Japan Nata Airport in the same manner as the cost of goods purchased at the east 147,601 of the cost of goods purchased at the east east 147,601 of the cost of the goods purchased at the east east west 1,647,966 of the cost of the goods (the total market price is 602,346,848 won), and brought them into the Republic of Korea in the way of hiding by inserting them by inserting them into the surrounding areas.

Accordingly, in collusion with D, H, I, and J, the Defendant imported 51 goods in total without filing a declaration thereon with the customs collector, including a sum of KRW 333,647,96 (total market value of KRW 602,346,848) of the cost of the goods.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the recognition of criminal facts ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads to the judge to have a reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof was not sufficiently enough to have such conviction, the determination should be made in the interests of the defendant even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable dismissal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do231, Jun. 28, 2012). B. The following is acceptable by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court.