The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (a fine of one million won, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, including the fact that the Defendant was committed in the first instance trial, and the fact that there was no same criminal record, etc., the act of smuggling import is highly likely to be subject to criticism against the legislative intent of the Customs Act with the aim of contributing to the development of the national economy by ensuring adequate imposition and collection of customs duties, customs clearance of exported and imported goods, and by securing customs revenue, and other various sentencing conditions as indicated in the record and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age and family environment, the background of the instant crime, the contents of the smuggling import goods, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, the judgment of the court below is applicable

1. Article 70 and Article 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014) in the column of detention in the Nowon-gu shall be “Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 201);

1. Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Code, and Article 282(2) of the Customs Act are clear that the phrase “Article 282(2) of the Customs Act” in the column of confiscation is an error in the phrase “Article 282(2) of the Customs Act, so each correction ex officio in accordance with Article 25(

.