The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, from March 2014 to May 2014, imported a package of three containers each month from China in a total of three times a month from China for a total of 12,00,000 won for a total of 12,00,000 won for a fertilizer (60 tons). Although the Defendant was not guilty of importing a melthead around April 21, 2014, the first instance court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, thereby misunderstanding the fact that the judgment affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the first instance court (a year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) in light of the reflectivity, age, health conditions, etc. of the defendant except for the part of the defendant's assertion that the sentencing is unfair is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the first instance trial and the first instance trial on the assertion of fact: (i) A witness BC examined at the first instance trial of 20,000 won per ton of the subsidiary container of 100,000 won per ton (200 tons) and deposited without a passbook; (ii) purchased a container of 20,000 US dollars at the same price on two occasions thereafter, and paid the price for the container by the same method as the one paid for warehouse expenses. However, the witness BC stated to the effect that the statement did not coincide with the Defendant’s assertion on the purchase time and price, etc., and it is difficult to believe that the Defendant failed to submit objective evidence related to the purchase of the subsidiary container of 20,000 won, and (iii) it was difficult for the Defendant to keep the container of 20,000 won in Gyeonggi-do after being imported from each domestic warehouse.