All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Criminal facts have to be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act); however, the selection of evidence and probative value based on the premise of fact-finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court (Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act); on the grounds the lower court, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, verified that (1) the description of goods based on the date seized at the office of Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) (hereinafter “the description of the instant goods”) was sent, “the place to which the goods were received,” “value”, “number of articles”, “cognized articles”, “cognized articles volume,” and “cognized English description for each gambling,” and on the bottom of some goods of this case, verified the details of goods and clothing imported by the Defendant’s owner, including the case’s account statement and contact details between the Defendant’s owner and the Defendant’s specific cost settlement, and (2) details and contact details of the goods imported during the settlement process.

The circumstantial guarantee of credit was made.

(B) On the other hand, it is difficult to recognize the credibility of the description of the imported goods stated in the description of the instant product because it failed to properly explain the details of the transaction with the third party, such as the details of the transportation cost payment to the shipping company and the details of the account settlement of expenses with I. On the other hand, the description of the imported goods stated in the description of the instant product is related to the shipping company, the details of the transportation cost payment for the shipping company, and the cost settlement with I who is the actual owner.