Goods subject to forfeiture, in case of attempted return, to be exempted from a customs duty for 80kiggs other than 120kigs, which are the legitimate import quantity of the goods subject to forfeiture

Article 180 of the Customs Act at the time of April 9, 1971, in cases where the goods were exempted from customs duties by deceit or other unlawful means, mean only the goods exempted from customs duties by deceit or other unlawful means. Thus, as if the 120 gramg of the 120 gram of the 120 gram of the 10 gram of the 120 gram of the 120 gram of the 120 gram of the 10 gram of the 120 gram of the 10 gram of the 10 gram of the 120 gram of the 120 gram of the 120 gram of the 120 gram of the above gram of the 120 gram of the gram shall not be confiscated.

Defendant

Attorney Kim Jae-in

Seoul High Court Decision 72No442 delivered on September 14, 1973

We reverse the original judgment. The case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal No. 2 are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the original judgment, when the defendant acquired 600 grams of distant water fisheries, which are exempted from customs duties, from 1971, from 1971, and then imported Allargsan, the court below recognized that the above grams of 1,00 per 1,00,000 per 1,00 grams of 3,000,000, were exempted from customs duties by means of fraud and 200 grams of 1,000,000,000 from 1,000,0000,0000,000,0000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 per 1,000,000,000,000,00.

It is reasonable to discuss this issue.

In this point, since the original judgment cannot be maintained, the judgment on other grounds of appeal is omitted, and the original judgment is reversed, and the original judgment is rendered again to the original judgment, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges except the presiding judge, the civil affairs flag, the classical police officer, the classical police officer, and the Kim Yong-chul.

The dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court judges, the public questioner, the classical bar, the roadside, and the Kim Yong-chul is as follows.

The goods subject to confiscation under Article 180 of the Customs Act at the time are goods that constitute an act of crime under the above provision of the Customs Act and in case where the defendant reported the market price of the imported goods at lower than the actual market price of the imported goods in this case and thereby the whole of the imported goods subject to the declaration is a goods that constitute a criminal act. Therefore, the court below is just in taking measures that forfeited the whole of the defendant's 200 kilograms reported at the above price by applying the above provision of the Customs Act under the above purport and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles of confiscation under Article 180 of the Customs Act

Justices Kim Jong-chul (Presiding Justice)