1. The number of crimes committed when goods stored in a bonded storage place are shipped out of the bonded storage place on several occasions without undergoing customs clearance;

2. The meaning of "amount of tax evaded" and "cost of goods" under Article 6 (2) 1 and 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 6 (4) 2 of the same Act;

1. Unlicensed import crimes concerning the release of goods stored in the bonded storage site, customs duties and defense cell evasion crimes are established under the provision of Article 2(1) of the Customs Act on the premise that customs duties and defense taxes are imposed and customs procedures are required as payment procedures whenever goods in the above bonded area are specifically shipped out of the bonded area under the provision of Article 2(1) of the Customs Act. Thus, one independent crime is established each time when the above taxable goods are taken out without the prescribed customs procedure.

2. “The cost of the goods” as referred to in Article 6(2)1, 2, 6(4)1 and 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes refers to the sum of the cost of the goods where a single customs evasion or a non-licensed import crime is established by simply one crime or by combining it, and it cannot be deemed that the sum of the amount of evaded customs duties and the cost of the goods is the sum of the cost of the goods in separate customs evasion or a non-licensed import crime punished for concurrent crimes.

Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 2 (1) of the Customs Act

Defendant 1 and one other

Prosecutor and Defendants

Busan District Court (83 High Court Decision 119)

The lower judgment against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for three years and by a fine for 183,880,224 won, and by imprisonment for two years and six months and a fine for 183,80,224 won, respectively.

The number of detention days prior to the declaration of the original judgment, one hundred and seventy days, shall be included in the above imprisonment.

When the defendants did not pay the above fine, the defendants shall be confined in the old house for the period calculated by converting the amount of KRW 1,000,000 into one day.

The amount of KRW 258,793,644 shall be collected from each of the Defendants.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by Defendant 1 and his defense counsel is as follows: first, the defendant did not have conspired with Defendant 2 and Nonindicted 1 for the purpose of evading customs duties or importing free licenses; first, the defendant's business was not related to the storage, shipping-out, etc. of goods stored in the bonded storage area, and thus, he did not know of the terms of the import agency contract with the Seoul Central Party, or the contents of the contract with the Korea Communications Corporation, and thus did not commit any act in violation of his duties; second, the court below found that the defendant committed any act in collusion with Defendant 2 and Nonindicted 1, which affected the conclusion of the judgment; second, the sentencing of the court below is too unfair; second, the summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant 2 and his defense counsel is that the crime was committed by Defendant 1, the commercial person, but the court below found that the defendant committed any crime in violation of this case in collusion with the defendant 1, etc.; second, the court below erred in the misapprehension of the facts against the defendant; second, the judgment below is erroneous.

In light of the records, in examining the various evidences duly adopted by the court below, the defendants' facts charged can be acknowledged, and even if examining the records, there is no error of law as pointed out in the arguments in the process of fact-finding of the court below.

However, in the instant case, since the crime of unlicensed import, customs duties and defense cell evasion of the preceding bonded area is established under the provisions of Article 2(1) of the Customs Act when the goods are specifically shipped out of the above bonded area, only one separate criminal act should be established each time when the above taxable goods are taken out without the prescribed import license or taxation procedure. Thus, the first 1-B crime was committed more than 12 days in the instant judgment, and the first 4-B crime was committed relatively close to 4 days in the instant case. However, according to the records, since the first 1-B crime was established under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes, each of the above crimes constitutes a single comprehensive crime of evasion of customs duties and the second 1-B-B-B-B-the-mentioned comprehensive crime of exclusion of customs duties, it is reasonable to view that the two separate criminal acts constitute a single comprehensive crime of omission of customs duties and the second 1-B-mentioned comprehensive crime of exclusion of customs duties, each of the separate crimes of exclusion of customs duties under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes.

Defendant 1 is the Deputy Director of the Ministry of Public Administration and Security of the Busan Metropolitan City branch, and Defendant 2 is each employed in the director in charge of storage and delivery of imported cargo stored in the same bonded storage place, and is engaged in the affairs of management, etc. of the storage of imported cargo stored in the same bonded storage place, and the treatment of the corporation is 1,000 tons per raw source from the Thailand under an import agency contract with the Seoul Central Party Co., Ltd. during the period from September 13, 1982 to September 13, 1982.

1. The Defendants, in collusion with Non-Indicted 2 and the managing director of the Seoul Central Party Co., Ltd., and Non-Indicted 1, shall not obtain an import license from the head of the Busan Customs Office, take out the quantities of each item at the same date and time as indicated in the separate list of crimes from among the above veterinary hospital, which was stored in the above bonded warehouse, and evade the prescribed customs duties and defense taxes on the goods;

2. The above original party, which was installed in the above storage place in collusion with the Defendants, has a duty to pay all expenses such as import price to the importer corporation, which was the actual user of the above original party, to deliver to the Seoul Central Party, in exchange for bills of lading or shipping documents such as delivery instruction, and delivery certificate and goods delivery certificate, which were received and presented from Treatment Co., Ltd., and presented from September 16, 1982 to September 28 of the same year, in violation of the above provision, the Defendants acquired 508.9 tons per the above original unit from September 16, 1982 to September 28 of the same year, and from November 9 to September 13 of the same year from September 13 of the same year, the above original party, which was the actual user of the above original party, from the above original unit, to pay all expenses, such as the import price, etc., to the importer corporation, thereby causing considerable damages to each of the Seoul Central Party.

The summary of the evidence as to the above facts is as stated in the judgment of the court below, and this is cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

피고인들의 판시 제1의 관세포탈의 소위중 별지 범죄일람표 ①내지 ⑥, ⑧내지 ⑭항의 각 소위는 관세법 제180조 제1항 , 형법 제30조 , 제33조 본문에, 제⑦항의 소위는 특정범죄가중처벌등에 관한 법률 제6조 제2항 제2호 , 관세법 제180조 제1항 , 형법 제30조 , 제33조 본문에, 동 방위세포탈의 소위는 각 방위세법 제13조 제1항 , 관세법 제180조 제1항 , 형법 제30조 , 제33조 본문에, 동 무면허수입의 소위중 같은 범죄일람표 제①,②,③,⑨,⑫내지 ⑭항의 각 소위는 관세법 제181조 , 형법 제30조 에, 제④ 내지 ⑧, ⑩, ⑪항의 각 소위는 특정범죄가중처벌등에 관한 법률 제6조 제4항 제2호 , 관세법 제181조 , 형법 제30조 에, 판시 제2의 업무상 배임의 각 소위중 같은 범죄일람표 제① 내지 ⑪항 및 제⑫내지 ⑭항의 각 소위는 포괄하여 각 형법 제356조 , 제355조 제2항 , 제30조 에 해당하는 바, 판시 제1의 관세포탈죄, 방위세포탈죄, 무면허수입죄 및 판시 제2의 각 업무상배임죄는 각 한개의 행위가 수개의 죄에 해당하는 경우이므로 형법 제40조 , 제50조 에 의하여 법정과 형이 무거운 판시 제1의 별지 범죄일람표 제①,②,③,⑨,⑫내지 ⑭항에 대한 각 죄에 대하여는 각 판시 제1의 각 관세포탈죄에 정한 형으로, 나머지 제④ 내지 ⑧, ⑩, ⑪에 대한 각 죄에 대하여는 판시 제1의 특정범죄가중처벌등에 관한 법률 제6조 제4항 제2호 위반죄에 정한 형으로 각 처벌하기로 하고 그 소정형중 관세포탈죄에 대하여는 징역형을 위 특정범죄가중처벌등에 관한 법률 제6조 제4항 제2호 위반죄에 대하여는 유기징역형을 각 선택하고, 이상은 형법 제37조 전단의 경합범이므로 같은법 제38조 제1항 제2호 , 제50조 에 의하여 위 별지 범죄일람표 제⑦항의 특정범죄가중처벌등에 관한 법률 위반죄의 형에 경합범가중을 하고, 피고인들은 초범이고 이건 범행으로 개인적인 이득을 취한 바 없고 범행후 포탈세액의 전부가 납부되었고, 법정태도로 보아 개전의 정이 엿보이는 점등 정상에 참작할 만한 사유가 있으므로 형법 제53조 , 제55조 제1항 제3호 에 의하여 작량감경을 한 형기범위내에서 피고인 1을 징역 3년에, 피고인 2를 징역 2년 6월에 각 처하고, 같은법 제57조 에 의하여 원심판결선고전의 구금일수중 170일씩을 피고인들에 대한 위 형에 각 산입하고, 피고인들에 대하여는 특정범죄가중처벌등에 관한 법률 제6조 제5항 에 의하여 벌금 183,880,224원을 각 병과하고, 피고인들이 위 벌금을 납입하지 아니하는 경우에는 형법 제70조 , 제69조 제2항 에 의하여 금 1,000,000원을 1일로 환산한 기간 피고인들을 노역장에 각 유치하고, 관세법 제180조 제1항 후단, 제181조 본문 후단에 의하여 판시 범칙물품을 몰수할 것이나 이미 소비되어 몰수할 수 없으므로 관세법 제198조 제1항 에 의하여 범칙당시의 국내 도매가격에 상당한 금 258,793,644원을 각 추징하기로 하여 주문과 같이 판결한다.

Judges Jeon Soo-tae (Presiding Judge)