Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a representative of E.

No foreign goods shall be imported by filing an import declaration with the head of a customs office on the goods different from the imported goods.

Nevertheless, on July 1, 2014, the Defendant ordered the F of China to scrap 21,60 Kg, and entered China into the front of the container at the time of the container operation of the relevant goods in question, and concealed the 2,400 Kg in the front of the container at the time of the container operation of the relevant goods into H on July 31, 2014 as if he/she were imported only by putting the 21,60 Kg in the front of the container at the time of the container operation, and brought the name of the goods at the time of filing an import declaration with the head of Incheon customs office on August 1, 2014 in the middle-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government as if he/she were imported only by breaking the 21,600 Kg in the lower end of the container.

7. As a result of the receipt of the report, the 21,60 Kg market price was 73,440,000 won at the 21,60 Kg market price, and the 129,600 Kg and the 440,640,000 won at the market price were tightly imported or attempted to import goods by filing a declaration on goods different from the goods in question, as described in the list of crimes in the attached Form, in the foregoing manner.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the accused by the prosecution;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police to J;

1. A written accusation;

1. Certificates of custody;

1. A report on detection;

1. Photographs of the exposed goods, X-ray search, etc.;

1. A detailed inquiry into details of the cargo goods;

1. Spherical photographs;

1. A report on the investigation into the appraised value of crushing and scrap [the defendant was unaware of the fact that the content of the instant goods failed to meet the requirements for the multiple atmosphere at the time of import of the instant goods, and there was no intention of smuggling because it could not be recognized.

The argument is asserted.

This Court has duly adopted and investigated the following circumstances, namely, in the case of multiple atmospheres, 20% of the content of the high-frequency and/or the total of them at least 40%, the rate of duty is 45% and the rate of duty is 45%.