Defendant shall be punished by a fine of eight million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

Any person shall file a report with the head of the competent customs office on the export or import of any means of payment exceeding 10,000 US dollars.

Nevertheless, around 10:00 on October 5, 2019, the Defendant entered Indonesia to B via Incheon International Airport, and attempted to conceal US$ 175,000 (Korean Won 210,647,50) without filing a report thereon with the head of the relevant customs office, and to import them by putting them into the travel capital, and then attempted to import them into the travel capital, which is discovered from the opening inspection of the entry inspection of the Kim Sea Airport.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Request for accusation against a suspected violation of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Copy of the declaration on personal effects of travelers;

1. A copy of an exchange rate inquiry;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs when detection;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 29 (2) and 29 (1) 4, and 17 of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, which select punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The part of forfeiture of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order and the part of 175,000 U.S. dollars (Evidence No. 1; hereinafter referred to as the "foreign currency of this case") that the defendant received without reporting the reason for sentencing shall not be subject to forfeiture under Article 30 of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, since the defendant had already acquired it lawfully in Indonesia, and it does not have

However, the foreign currency of this case seems to be subject to confiscation under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act, which is an article provided in the act of importing foreign currency without reporting by the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Do515 delivered on September 4, 2002). However, the confiscation under Article 30 of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act and the confiscation under Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act differs from their legal nature; the confiscation of the foreign currency of this case, other than the sentence of a fine to the defendant, appears to be harsh; the crime was committed on the attempted charge; and the Defendant exceeded the fine.