logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.06.14 2018고합280
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(관세)등
Text

1. Defendant A

(a) The sentence shall be suspended for the defendant;

B. Of the charges against the Defendant.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The defendant A shall serve as a managing director of a stock company B in Gwangju-si, Jeonyang-si, and the name, standard, price and other matters prescribed by Presidential Decree shall be reported to the head of the relevant customs office to import goods, and shall not import goods different from those on which the relevant imported goods are reported;

A. On September 5, 2014, the Defendant imported the blux site (BRUCE Decision No. 2530.90-9099) cost 43,753,182 won (market price 46,151,374 won) from China’s D in light of the opticalyang Port located in 755, as the Mayang-si Port, Jeonyang-nam, 2014. However, the Defendant filed an import declaration (MAGNES Decision No. 2519.90-2000) as if it were imported from China to avoid the quota limitation for export of natural minerals of China. However, the Defendant filed an import declaration (MAM) with goods different from that of the imported goods as if it were imported from China.

In addition, from around that time to November 27, 2014, the Defendant imported the total amount of KRW 1,900,000g of the Brazil site and the total amount of KRW 295,472,606 in four times, as indicated in [Attachment 1-4] No. 1-4 of the List of Offenses.

B. On September 4, 2015, the Defendant: (a) imported chemical manufactured goods (determined No. 3824.90-9090) that are not classified according to the tariff rate of 6.5%, as a kind of fishery goods in China from Chinese F, the Defendant actually imported the amount equivalent to KRW 40,000 g cost of 7,022,442 (market price of 10,938,3833), which is equivalent to the amount of 3% of the customs duty rate of 3% of the natural goods; (b) but (c) imported the Mineine Potium OXID decision No. 2519.90-200 of the customs duty rate of 6.5% of the imported goods.

In addition, from around that time to October 28, 2015, the Defendant, as indicated in Section 5-9, and No. 11 of the annexed Table of Crime Scotasia fishery cargo, is a kind of chemical product “non-classified” in total of 1,000,000 g, cost, 173,271.

arrow