A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Punishment of the crime

When it is intended to export, import or return goods, the name, standard, quantity and price of the relevant goods, and other matters prescribed by Presidential Decree, shall be reported to the head of a customs office.

The Defendant, along with “D”, “D” and “D” merchants E, agreed to import the Montreal in Japan, and the Defendant, purchased in Japan, delivered the Montreal to D, “D,” and “D” to E, who entered Japan, without reporting to the customs office, to deliver it to the Defendant.

“D” on December 22, 2015, Japan sealed and delivered to E a set of 151,961,069, the market price of which is equivalent to KRW 151,961,069, in the form of tape and sealed 81,000, and “E” imported smuggling by failing to report to the customs, when entering the airport of the upper Dol, Kim-hae, in order to deliver this to the Defendant.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with E and D, imported 81 amond worth of KRW 151,961,069 at a market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Part of the protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution (including the E part of the statement);

1. Statement protocol with respect to E;

1. Application of a detailed statement of account transactions, investigation report (E, reporting on the entry into or departure from the Republic of Korea, copy of the result of the multimond appraisal), or application of the statute of accusation;

1. The reason for sentencing a sentence of imprisonment under Article 269(2)1 and Article 241(1) of the Customs Act regarding the crime in question lies in the fact that the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on the one-year basis of a violation of the same Customs Act in 2008 (the crime related to smuggling export, etc. similar to this case) by committing a crime in violation of the same Act in 2008. The crime in this case appears to have led the Defendant to commit the crime in this case, according to relevant evidence, according to the fact that the scale of the crime in this case is small and related evidence, the Defendant appears to have committed the crime in this case, and after the detection of the crime in smuggling, it is not good that the Defendant requested the accomplice to make a false statement.