All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles requested a Chinese exporter to reissue a sanitary certificate at the request of the person in charge of the Food and Drug Administration, and the Chinese exporter did not have any problem when he treats the niver language exported to Hong Kong and re-import it. Thus, Defendant A had no intention to violate the Customs Act, and Defendant B did not neglect the supervisory duty.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the facts charged of this case guilty. The court below erred by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (a fine of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances admitted by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine, Defendant A returned domestic freezing fish which was judged non-conformity with quarantine to Hong Kong, and reported the importation under the name of the F as if other misleading fish was imported, thereby sufficiently recognizing the fact that Defendant A reported false import or false declaration and intent of violating the Customs Act.

Therefore, the defendants' assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

① Defendant A led to the confession of all the facts charged at the court of first instance, which led to the reversal of the confession of this part of the facts charged.

Defendant

A’s confession in the court of first instance is not sufficient to conclude that the probative value or credibility of the confession is doubtful solely on the grounds that the confession in the court of appeal differs from the statement in the court of appeal. In determining the credibility of the confession, the content of the confession itself is objectively rational, what is the motive or reason of the confession, what is the motive or reason of the confession, and what is the circumstance leading up to the confession, and what is the circumstantial evidence other than the confession.