(영문) 부산지방법원 2009.1.20.선고 2008고합437 판결

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months and by a fine of 1,245,225,352 won. If the Defendant fails to pay the above fine, the period calculated by converting 4,00,000 won into one day shall be confined in the workhouse: Provided, That the fractional amount shall be one day: three days of detention before the sentence of this judgment is made shall be included in the above imprisonment with prison labor.

To order the defendant to pay an amount equivalent to the above fine.

Reasons

Criminal History Office

The Defendant, as an accountant in Vietnam, is operating 'xx accounting limited liability company' in Vietnam. On November 2006, the Defendant, in collusion with C and B, to introduce and request a company which can lead to a disguised origin of the head of Australia in Vietnam in the case of importing from B, China, the import of China, the import of which is prohibited from C and B, in the name of Vietnam, from November 2006, in the name of Vietnam, and to receive 580 to 630 U.S. dollars per ton of 1 ton of Y, and to accept it;

1. On November 26, 2006, C wishes to purchase 21 ton of China's Chinese heading 21 to US$163,80 (Korean 153,88,462 won) from China's F, and transfers the price to China through "ZZg", which is a trade company in Vietnam, the defendant introduced by the defendant, and the defendant issued a quarantine certificate of the Vietnam authority's exporting country to disguised the origin of the above heading that F sent to Vietnam, and then confirmed whether the Zging's heading's origin to be displayed on the packaging boxes of the above heading in Korea kept in the bonded warehouse is properly carried out, and at the same time, the Zging company did not issue the quarantine certificate of the Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea'

2. C received from F the transport of USD 327,600 (Korean US$ 305,405,100) of China’s China’s Republic of Korea from F, and then sent the head’s country of origin to Korea in the name of ZZ in the name of the Republic of Korea by falsely marking the country of origin of the head’s Republic of Korea with Vietnam, and C, B, B, andY Trade’s name on December 13, 2006 in the name of YY Trade, by importing the amount equivalent to KRW 305,405,100 of the cost of the Republic of Korea’s heading 42 tons in the above China’s Republic of Korea, through the Busan Customs on December 13, 2006, by falsely indicating the country of origin of the agricultural product for the purpose of selling the heading of China whose import is prohibited, without obtaining permission necessary

3. C has received transportation from F equivalent to US$ 335,00 (Korean US$ 318,028,90) of the Republic of Korea from China from China F, and then falsely marked the origin of the head of the head of the tax to Vietnam and sent it to Korea in the name of the ZZ in the name of the Republic of Korea. On February 9, 2007, through Busan Customs office around February 9, 2007, by importing the amount of KRW 318,028,90 of the cost of the Republic of Korea from the Republic of Korea to the above 100 tons of the cost of the Republic of Korea from China through Busan Customs office, with the false indication of the origin of the agricultural products for the purpose of selling domestic head of the tax base whose import is prohibited, as well as without obtaining permission necessary for such importation; and

4. F purchased USD 655,200 (Korean US$ 621,791,352) of the Republic of Korea from F and decided to illegally import 84 tons of the Republic of Korea by means of the aforementioned methods. Around February 26, 2007, in the presence of the Nonghyup Office adjacent to the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Youngpo Port, the Republic of Korea received KRW 19,00,000 in return for a disguised country of origin of the head. Around March 2, 2007, the Republic of Korea received KRW 27,750,000 in the Defendant’s wife E account under the same name and received KRW 27,750,00 in the Defendant’s wife’s account on April 3, 2007, around KRW 327,000 in the amount of USD 84,000 in the above head of the household, and did not obtain the necessary evidence for the purpose of importing KRW 827,3125,2000 among domestic products.

Omission

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 270(2) and 241(1) of the Customs Act, Articles 30 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 6(5)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 270(2) and Article 241(1) of the Customs Act, Article 30 (2) of the Criminal Act, Article 74-2 and Article 4 subparag. 7 of the Food Sanitation Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 34-2, Article 17 subparag. 1, and Article 15(1) of the same Act, Article 30 (1) of the Quality Control of Agricultural Products Act, Article 6(7) and (5)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 271(2), Article 270(2) and Article 241(3) of the Customs Act, Article 74-2 and Article 4(1) of the Food Sanitation Act, Article 30 (1) of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act and each violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Customs Duties) and each Food Sanitation Act, with heavy punishment, and between the violation of the Customs Act and the violation of the Food Sanitation Act, the punishment prescribed for the violation of the Food Sanitation Act, each violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Customs Duties) and each violation of the Food Sanitation Act shall be imposed

1. Selection of punishment;

Imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Food Sanitation Act and each violation of the Agricultural Products Quality Control Act;

1. Imposition of fines concurrently;

Article 6 (7) and (6) 5 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Customs Duties in Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes (limited to imprisonment);

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [Article 38 (1) 2 of the Criminal Act shall be excluded from the application of imprisonment provided for in the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Customs Duties) of the Criminal Act, Article 278 (1) of the Criminal Act, with respect to a fine for concurrent crimes and a fine)

1. Discretionary mitigation (limited to imprisonment);

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the first offender and the concurrent imposition of a large amount of fine)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Inclusion of days of detention in detention;

Article 57 of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

The crime of this case in collusion with C, B, etc. was imported by the Defendant through the disguised origin of China, the import of which is prohibited due to disease and insect pests that may cause serious harm to Korean agricultural products.

The defendant committed the crime of this case even though he knows that disease and insect pests may cause enormous damage to Korean fruit farmers when he flows into the Republic of Korea. The crime of this case was committed systematically and systematically, and plannedly, even if the crime was committed, even if he was excluded from the reserve, he was imported by the defendant. The above head has already been sold in the Republic of Korea. The defendant is a large amount of 100 million won or more, and the defendant is a certified accountant of a prestigious death, who is a certified accountant of a prestigious death, and has a life with no economic shortage, and even though he was living in the Republic of Korea, he is likely to be subject to such a crime, and even though he was living in the Republic of Korea, he could be subject to the crime until this court was committed, the defendant did not have any criminal conviction, even if he did not seem to be consistent with the defendant's act of denying himself, and even if he did not have any other criminal conviction.