A. From January 1, 1968, Article 6(4) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes cannot be applied to the import without a license under the Customs Act before the amendment by Act No. 2032, Jul. 15, 1968

B. Error in the application of substantive law and violation of law that affected the judgment

C. Violation of law that affected the judgment constitutes a ground for ex officio destruction by the court of final appeal.

A. From January 1, 1968, Article 6(4) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes cannot be applied to the import without a license under the Customs Act before the amendment by Act No. 2032, Jul. 15, 1968.

B. Article 198-2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Act No. 1976, Jan. 1, 68) enforced at the time of the judgment of the court below (1968.1.25) does not provide for Article 198-2, and Article 6 (4) 2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes does not provide for the elements of

C. Violation of Acts and subordinate statutes affecting the judgment constitutes grounds for ex officio destruction by the court of final appeal.

Article 6(4) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; Article 181 of the Customs Act (Customs Act 1976); Articles 383(1) and 384 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 67No181 delivered on January 25, 1968

The original judgment shall be reversed, and

The case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

Before examining the grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel, the court below's decision shall be applied ex officio.

Article 6(4)2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (referring to the former Act before amended by Act No. 2032, Jul. 15, 1968) shall apply to the Defendant’s non-licensed import activities from among the crimes committed by the Defendant at the time of original markets. However, under Article 6(4) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 1968, Jan. 25, 1968), the person who committed the crimes provided for in Article 198-2 of the Customs Act shall be punished aggravatingly as follows:

1. Where the cost of goods performed, imported or returned without obtaining a license as prescribed in Article 114 of the Customs Act (hereinafter in this Article referred to as the “cost of goods”) is not less than one million won, the person shall be punished by death or imprisonment for life or for not less than 10 years;

2. Article 198-2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 1976, Jan. 1, 1968) provides that the cost of goods is not less than 500,00 won but less than one million won, shall be punished by imprisonment for life or for not less than 5 years. However, Article 6 (2) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 1976, Jan. 1, 1968) does not provide that the elements shall be elements, and Article 6 (2) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes cannot be applied (the current Act does not provide that Article 9 of the Addenda of the Criminal Act shall not apply to the current Act). However, the judgment of the court below that applied the provision is contrary to the Act that affected the judgment

The presiding judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) of the Red Marins (Presiding Justice)