(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.2.5. 선고 2014고정5718 판결

Where a defendant A fails to pay the above fine, the above defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting 100,000 won into one day.

To order the Defendants to pay an amount equivalent to the above fines.

Reasons

Criminal facts

From February 18, 2005, Defendant A is a person who is working as the representative director of Company B from February 18, 2005, Defendant B is a corporation that was established on April 13, 2004 and is engaged in the manufacturing and wholesale business of medical services on the third floor of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City E-building.

Any person who intends to import goods shall report to the head of a customs office the name, size, quantity and price of the relevant goods, and other matters prescribed by Presidential Decree, and shall not make a false declaration on the dutiable value or customs duty rate in order to affect the determination of the amount

1. Defendant A

On September 18, 2010, through the Incheon Airport Customs, the Defendant: (a) imported 30 minc clocks from the Chinese ACEFUFACURING LTD (F) and actually goods priceed to KRW 15,995,205; (b) filed a declaration of low price to the customs office of KRW 7,819,878; (c) evaded customs duties equivalent to KRW 1,308,051 to be imposed; (d) filed a declaration of low price to the customs office of KRW 7,819,878; and (e) filed a declaration of import with the customs office of Incheon on August 22, 2011; (e) filed an import declaration to the customs office of KRW 65,300; (e) filed an import declaration to the customs office of KRW 860; (e) filed an import declaration to the customs office of KRW 3609,150; and (e) filed an import declaration to the customs office of KRW 960.10.10.1.

From September 22, 2009 to December 12, 2013, the Defendant evaded customs duties of KRW 19,751,510 (the market price is equivalent to KRW 2,253,512,378) over 48 occasions, such as the attached list 1, 2, and 3, in order to reduce the burden of corporate operating funds.

2. Defendant B

The defendant committed an act in violation of paragraph (1) in relation to the defendant's business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A survey report and an appraisal report;

1. (State), the outline of the B Company, (State, the copy of the corporate registry of the BB Credit Investigation Report, (State B) the export performance of the B Party, (State) the sales performance of the B Party B, (State) the details of the revenue opening and settlement of the B Party, (State)B import performance, B or other import declaration (unit comparison), the list of B customs clearance performance, (State)B import declaration, and (StateB electronic tax invoice copy;

1. A file output;

1. Transfer Receipt (20.6. 21. 20) and Attachment 20.3, 10, 20, 10, 20, 20, 20, 20, 10, 20, 20, 20, 20, 10, 30, 20, 200, 20, 20, 10, 30, 201, 20, 10, 201, 20, 30, 200, 20, 201, 3,000, 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,000,00,000,00,00

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Article 270(1)1 of the Customs Act and Article 241(1) of the same Act (Selection of Fines) (Selection of Fines);

(b) Defendant B: the main sentence of Article 279(1), Articles 270(1)1 and 241(1) of the Customs Act

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Defendants: former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and Article 278 of the Customs Act (the provision of Article 38 (1) 2 of the Criminal Act shall not apply and the amount of fine shall be calculated separately for each act and added up)

1. Determination of sentence;

Defendants: 15 million won each

1. Invitation of a workhouse;

Defendant*: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendants: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act