beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
B and C shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for 3 years and by fine for 446,954,724 won.
Defendant
B, C.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant B’s misunderstanding of the facts as to Defendant B’s goods imported in smuggling upon P’s request, and Defendant B did not recognize the fact that the goods were domestically produced and sent out of the Republic of Korea, i.e., secondary medicine treatment chemicals, and Mepta (hereinafter referred to as “in sequence”), and that all of them were carried out, Defendant B did not have any negligence on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Customs Duties) and the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc.
subsection (b) of this section.
B) The lower court erred in recognizing the sum of the costs of the goods for domestic pre-production treatment in the instant case as KRW 893,909,448.
C) Nevertheless, the court below found Defendant B guilty of all the charges, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
2) The lower court’s sentencing on Defendant B is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant C1) After finding the instant smuggling by a customs officer affiliated with Pyeongtaek-si customs office, U is not deemed to have commenced an investigation as to a person who violated the Customs Act when U is transferred the instant smuggling as a customs officer affiliated with Pyeongtaek-si customs office. Thus, U’s arbitrary submission of the instant smuggling to a customs officer affiliated with U holder or custodian at his own discretion is unlawful. The instant smuggling is deemed to have been seized in violation of the seizure procedure and constitutes illegally collected evidence, and thus, all of the secondary evidence obtained based on the instant smuggling and the secondary evidence obtained based thereon are inadmissible.
B) Defendant C did not fully recognize the fact that the smuggling was a domestic source therapy and a penphone during the instant case, and thus, Defendant C violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Customs Duties) and customs duties.