An application for import license, which is made in the highest amount of semi-finished goods with a misleading knowledge of the items subject to the same approval as an importer or prohibited items, and an "unfair act" under Article 33 (1) of the Trade Business Act.

The term "person who has obtained permission for import by fraudulent or other unlawful means" in subparagraph 1 of Article 33 of the Trading Business Act refers to a person who has obtained permission for import by means of a deceptive scheme or other acts which are considered to be unfair by social norms, even though it is not possible to obtain permission for import by means of a normal procedure. Thus, even if an importer applies for permission for import by misrepresentation of import-restricted items or semi-finished items, it shall not be deemed that the imported goods are items whose import is approved by fraudulent or other unlawful acts, so long as the importer is the same and the importer is

Article 33 subparag. 1 of the Trading Business Act, Article 27 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 1 and one other

Defendants

Attorney Lee Jae-in

Seoul High Court Decision 79No1804 delivered on July 2, 1982

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Defendant 1’s defense counsel is examined as well as Defendant 1’s defense counsel, Defendants’ cause of defense counsel, and Defendant 2’s grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Defendant 1: (a) was aware of the fact that it constitutes an import-free steel type 3 different from Japan’s 197 August 7, 197; (b) was approved for import-free steel type 3 meters and 4m-MM 292; (c) Defendant 1 was approved for import-free steel type 3 different from Japan’s 17-free steel type; (d) was approved for import-free steel type 3 different from Japan’s 17-free steel type 3-free steel type 1; (e) was so falsely approved for import-free steel type 3-free steel type 3-free steel type import-free steel type 3-free steel type import-free steel type 17-free steel type 3-free steel type import-free steel type import-free products; and (e) was so approved for import-free steel type 17-13-day import-free steel type 3-day import-free steel type 3-free steel type import-free goods.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendants of the conjunctive facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles as to a person who obtained permission for import by deceit or other unlawful act under Article 33 subparagraph 1 of the Trade Business Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the appeal pointing this out is with merit and the judgment of the court below

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jung-soo (Presiding Justice)