The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A, B, and C shall be sentenced to one year of imprisonment, and the defendant AC shall be sentenced to a fine of KRW 10,00,000.

The summary of the grounds for appeal and misunderstanding of the legal principles as to Defendant A’s misunderstanding of the above Defendant A’s facts and the above Defendant deemed the cost of the goods of 5,00 won in China (200 ml, hereinafter referred to as the “in this case”) which the above Defendant attempted to import, to reach KRW 225,000,000, and thus, the value of 45,000 won in this case’s esticide reaches KRW 25,00,000,000. As to Article 6(2)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter referred to as the “Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) as to the crime of 2-A of Article 6(2) of the judgment of the court below, Article 6(2)2(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment of Customs Offenses) ②

1. If the cost of imported goods is five hundred million won or more, the person shall be punished by imprisonment for life or for not less than five years;

2. Where the cost of imported goods is at least two hundred million won but less than five hundred million won, the person shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than three years;

Article 269, Paragraph 2 of the Customs Act was applied.

However, the cost of the instant insecticide No. 1 is less than KRW 200,00,000, even if the price of the instant insecticide No. 45,000 and the total amount of the forged goods that the said Defendant attempted to import is consistent with the Eleven (hereinafter “the above inside”) currency of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter “China”).

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Act on the Aggravation of Specific Crimes was applied, thereby erroneously applying the Act.

The sentence against Defendant A (the imprisonment of one year and six months and the fine of 296,456,614, and confiscation) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B and misunderstanding of the legal principles and misunderstanding of the facts of the AC, Defendant B knew that Defendant A and C intended to import pesticides only, and did not know the cost, quantity, etc. of the insectide of this case, the lower court that applied the specific crime aggravated Act to Defendant B is unreasonable.

In addition, Defendant B did not know at all that Defendant A and C intended to import forged goods.

Therefore, the smuggling imports of counterfeit goods; and