Where there was an error of overlapping collection of additional collection;

The additional collection of Article 42 of the damp Medicines Management Act is a punitive purpose for deprivation of illegal profits and suppression of crime. However, if the same person takes over and transfers the same damp drugs, and if he/she commits a crime, he/she may not transfer the damp drugs acquired by the offender to another person, and may not confiscate the same damp drugs. As long as he/she has collected the value, he/she shall not additionally collect the value of the same damp drugs from another person.

Article 42 of the Dried Medicines Control Act

Defendant

Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court of the first instance (76 High Court Decision 1101)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

75 days from the detention days prior to the pronouncement of the judgment below shall be included in the above sentence.

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

65,534,500 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

First of the gist of the defendant's appeal, the court below found the defendant guilty as to the whole facts charged by finding the defendant guilty on the evidence of the interrogation protocol, etc. of the defendant as to the preparation of a false confession by adviser in the prosecutor's office, even though the defendant was guilty of the purchase and delivery of the paper paper as to the defendant, although the defendant did not assist the defendant to commit the above crimes, the court below acknowledged the defendant as a co-principal in the above crimes, and therefore there was an error of law by misunderstanding the facts affecting the conclusion of the judgment, and second, the judgment of the court below is unreasonable because the defendant was too large to have the amount of the punishment sentenced by the court below.

Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant, the lower court ex officio examined the facts of each of the above assignment by the Defendant, in addition to the collection of the value of each of the above assignment by the Defendant, as well as the additional collection of each of the above assignment by the Defendant, on the following grounds: (a) the Mesa (tentatively named Mesapa) was assigned to the Defendant at the time of original judgment; (b) it was the time of original judgment; (c) it was impossible to confiscate the Mesa, which is a damp medicine purchased or delivered in Mesa; and (d) it was the fact that the Mesa, the Defendant,

However, the value of the damp Medicines provided as a crime under this Act under Article 42 of the damp Medicines Management Act shall be confiscated, but if it is impossible to confiscate it, it shall be collected from the offender for the purpose of deprivation of illegal profit and suppression of crime. However, if the same person takes over and transfers the same damp Drugs, and if the same person commits a crime, it shall not be confiscated by transferring it to another person, and as long as the value is collected by adding it, it shall not be collected in parallel for the fact of transfer of the same damp Medicines.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles of additional collection under the Water-Related Medicines Management Act and by misunderstanding the additional collection under the same Act, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed without determining the remaining grounds for appeal.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the member is again decided.

(Criminal Facts and Summary of Evidence)

The criminal facts of the defendant recognized as a party member and the summary of the evidence are as shown in each corresponding case of the judgment of the court below, and all of them are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

(Application of Acts and subordinate statutes)

Article 35(1), Article 21(1)2 of the Foreign Exchange Control Act, Article 38-3(1)1, Article 3(1)1, Article 2(1)3, Article 186(1)3 of the Customs Act, the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act.

(Concurrent Aggravation of Crimes of Violation of the Foreign Exchange Control Act)

Article 57 of the Criminal Act, Article 36-2 of the Foreign Exchange Control Act, Article 42 (1) of the damp Medicines Management Act, Article 186 (1) and Article 198 of the Customs Act

Judges Oral-ho (Presiding Judge)