A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operated C in the king-si, which runs the wholesale and retail business of grain, agricultural products, bean products, etc.

On May 23, 2012, the Defendant acquired 250 kilograms of China from E by purchasing 1,325,000 won, even though he/she was aware that it was a good imported from China through a single luxa, without filing a report thereon with the head of the customs office, from Jung-gu Incheon, Jung-gu, Incheon, and the first floor E.

From that time to October 2, 2013, the Defendant acquired 40,880 kilograms of total amount equivalent to 219,332,00 won in the same way as indicated in the attached list of crimes through the same method.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A copy of the 9th police interrogation protocol regarding E;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written appraisal;

1. Article 274 (1) 1 and Article 269 (2) 1 of the Customs Act and the choice of imprisonment, inclusive, with prison labor for the crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 282 (3) and (2) of the Customs Act (the investigation records, 674, 685 pages);

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is punishable by imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendant, on the grounds that, even though the Defendant knew of the fact that domestic agricultural products were closely imported without undergoing necessary procedures, such as an import declaration or quarantine, the Defendant acquired, and sold, for about one year and four months, imported agricultural products, and took unfair profits by selling them to the general public.

However, it does not seem that the defendant recognized the crime of this case for the purpose of particularly negative profit, and the defendant determined the term of punishment in consideration of the fact that the defendant is the first offender who has no power, and suspended the execution of the punishment.