Confiscation of Article 4 of the Forestry Products Control Act and confiscation of Article 48 (1) of the Criminal Act

In Article 4 of the Forestry Products Control Act, forest products shipped out without legitimate production confirmation marks are confiscated as necessary, but according to Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act, those owned by a third party are confiscated only when they are acquired with the knowledge of the fact. Thus, it cannot be confiscated even if it is based on Article 4 of the Forestry Products Control Act, unless it is recognized that the third party acquired them from an offender with the knowledge of the fact.

Article 4 of the Forestry Products Control Act, Article 48 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 66Do1415 delivered on November 29, 1966 (Supreme Court Decision 3676Da1776 delivered on October 22, 1974, Article 4 (2) 1729 of the Control of Forestry Products Act) 74Do2441 delivered on October 22, 1974 (Supreme Court Decision 108Da 10837 delivered on November 27, 208, Decision 223Do15 delivered on November 26, 196, Decision 500No8066 delivered on July 26, 196)

Defendant

Prosecutor and Defendant

Chuncheon District Court of the first instance (72 Gohap164 delivered on July 1, 200)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

The thirty-five days of detention days prior to the pronouncement of the judgment below shall be included in the above sentence.

Part 121 (No. 2,5,7), part 30 (No. 3,6), and one seal (No. 8) shall be confiscated from the defendant.

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is that the amount of the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unfasible and unfair, and the defendant has not submitted the grounds for appeal.

However, by comparing the judgment below ex officio with the records, in Article 4 of the Forestry Products Control Act, the forest products shipped out without a lawful production confirmation mark are to be confiscated as necessary. However, according to Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act, if a third party acquired them with the knowledge of the fact, and if in this case, if a third party acquired them with the knowledge of the fact that the forest products were shipped out without a lawful production verification mark, then in this case, it shall be confiscated only if the third party acquired them with the knowledge of the fact that the forest products were shipped out without a lawful production verification mark. In this case, in this case, there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that the court below's 20 hump 1 out of those confiscated by the defendant and 40 hump 40 out of those confiscated by the defendant was owned by the non-indicted 2.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed without the need to proceed with the remaining grounds for appeal by the public prosecutor, since the goods owned by a third party which cannot be confiscated in light of the fact that the judgment below affected the judgment. Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the members shall be decided again as follows.

Since the criminal facts and evidence relations acknowledged by a member against the defendant are identical to those of the judgment below, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Article 225 of the Criminal Act, Article 229, Article 225 of the same Act, Article 225 of the same Act, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 7 (1) and Article 3 (1) of the Forestry Products Control Act, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 1 of the judgment of the court below, Article 38 of the same Act, Article 25 of the same Act, Article 1 of the judgment of the court below, Article 225 of the same Act, Article 22 of the same Act, Article 25 of the same Act, Article 22 of the judgment of the court below, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 3 of the same Act, Article 4 of the same Act, Article 55 (1) 2 of the same Act, the defendant's each violation of the Forestry Products Control Act, and Article 1 of the same Act, Article 57 of the same Act, the same Act, shall be included within the period of imprisonment of 1.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Man-Operation (Presiding Judge)