The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Article 282 (2) of the Customs Act, which applies to the instant case by misunderstanding legal principles, provides that "the goods owned or occupied by a criminal shall be forfeited," unlike Article 282 (1) of the same Act, where the goods are still existing and the goods to be seized are not existing, such as the goods already disposed of to another person, the confiscation shall not be made, and the additional collection shall not be made pursuant to Article 282 (3) of the same Act. However, the judgment of the court below which sentenced the Defendant to the additional collection shall be recognized

The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, fine of 100 million won, and additional collection) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Article 282(2) and (3) of the Customs Act provides that a person who imports goods without filing a declaration under Article 241 of the same Act shall confiscate the imported goods that he/she owns or occupies, and where the whole or part of the goods to be forfeited cannot be confiscated, an amount equivalent to the domestic wholesale price at the time of the offense of the goods not confiscated shall be collected from the offender. Here, “when confiscation is impossible” includes not only cases where the offender uses and conceals them, etc., but also cases where the ownership or possession may be attributed to the offender’s interest, such as the offender’s consumption or concealment, etc., but also cases where the damage or loss irrelevant to the offender’s interest, or any other obstacle due to the place where the offender is located (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8401, Dec. 28, 2007). If the offender owns or possesses smuggling, it may be confiscated or collected in accordance with Article 282 of the Customs Act, regardless of whether the offender owns or possesses them at a time when confiscation or confiscation is possible.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do3478, Jul. 29, 2005). Therefore, the same applies.