The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant prepared an export declaration in advance without specifying the export goods. In this case, the product quantity, price, etc. of the exported goods stated in the export declaration cannot be identical at source with the actual export goods and some goods are likely to coincide with the HS classification code in the case of the goods, but it is merely an incidental result and it is difficult to recognize the identity of the goods stated in the export declaration for the goods actually exported by the Defendant, and it is difficult to recognize the identity of the goods stated in the export declaration for the Defendant, but the lower court determined otherwise by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. With respect to the violation of the Customs Act due to the declaration of other goods (main facts charged), the court below found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is not sufficient to recognize that the Defendant actually exported goods and what is the classification code of the goods, and what is the actual classification code of the goods are different from the classification code of the goods declared in accordance with the export declaration and the classification code of the goods declared in accordance with the export declaration, not all goods other than the goods declared in accordance with the export declaration. The identity between the goods declared in accordance with the export declaration and the goods declared in accordance with the export declaration is recognized.