Cases of determining that there is no intention to commit a crime of evading customs duties;

If, at the time of customs clearance, if the two winners of the herb drugs already imported by the defendant knew that they were mistakenly included, the defendant had no obligation to pay customs duties on the melting herb drugs, it can be inferred that the defendant had an intention to evade customs duties by making the above melting the herb drugs through customs clearance by fraud.

Article 180 of the Customs Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul Criminal District Court Decision 68No627 delivered on June 17, 1969, Seoul High Court Decision 68No627 delivered on June 17, 1969

The original judgment shall be reversed, and

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The first ground for appeal by the Prosecutor is examined.

1. According to the original judgment, the court below found that the defendant was not guilty of the above import declaration for the first time on March 1, 1968, and found that there were 5 separate customs clearance charges for the above imported herb goods, and that there were no such separate customs clearance charges for the first time on the imported herb goods, and that there was no such separate customs clearance charges for the first time on the imported herb goods, and that there was no such separate customs clearance charges for the second time on the imported herb goods, and that there was no such separate customs clearance charges for the second time on the imported herb goods, and that there was no such a false customs clearance charges for the second time on the import clearance of the goods, and that there was no such a false customs clearance charges for the second time on the imported herb goods, and that there was no such a false customs clearance charges for the second time on the imported goods, and that there was no such a false customs clearance charges for the second time on the imported goods, and that there was no such a false customs clearance charges for the second time on the imported goods prior to such customs clearance charges.

Therefore, the judgment on the second ground of appeal is omitted, and the final appeal is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition in accordance with Article 391 of the Criminal Procedure Act according to the unanimous opinion of all participating judges.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Ma-dong (Presiding Judge) and Ma-dong B-Jed Han-gu