The case holding that Article IX (3) (c) of the Agreement between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America regarding Facilities and Areas and the Status of United States Armed Forces in the Republic of Korea is not subject to non-taxation under Article IX (3) (c) of the Mutual Defense Treaty in consideration of the whole types

The case holding that goods are not subject to non-taxation under Article IX (3) (c) of the Agreement between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America regarding Facilities and Areas and the Status of United States Armed Forces in the Republic of Korea, taking into account the whole types and quantities of goods.

Article IX(3)(c) of the Agreement under Article IV of the Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America regarding Facilities and Areas and the Status of United States Armed Forces in the Republic of Korea

A

Defendant

Attorney B

Seoul High Court Decision 84No2795 delivered on January 17, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, the evidence used in the judgment of the court of first instance can be reviewed and accepted, and there is no error of law such as theory of lawsuit in the process of evidence preparation.In theory, this case's imported goods refer to Article 9 (3) (c) of the Agreement between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America on Facilities and Areas and the Status of United States Armed Forces in the Republic of Korea under Article 4 of the Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America and the United States of America, but it is clear that the case's imported goods sent by military mail in Hong Kong located in Hong Kong is 326 points in the record. Among them, even if the goods are included in individual and household goods such as the above theory of lawsuit, it can not be deemed as a reasonable amount of personal goods and household goods ordinarily purchased in the United States of America, and thus, it cannot be deemed as non-taxable goods. Thus, the judgment of the court below in the same purport as the judgment of the court below is justified.

In addition, five of the seven parcels sent by military mail does not fall under the legitimate grounds for objection of the ship in this case for which three years have passed since the defendant asserts mistake of facts, and it is obvious that the provisions of Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act are not valid.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)