It is reasonable to view that if an import declaration is filed with the authority as the intention to use the goods for any purpose other than the designated purpose by obtaining customs exemption from the beginning, and the goods are disposed of during the time of carrying the import license, they constitute an element of establishment under Article 180 (2) of the Customs Act

If, from the beginning, an import declaration is filed with the authority to use the goods for any purpose other than the designated purpose and the goods are sold and disposed of in the market with the import license, it constitutes the elements of paragraph (2) of this Article.

Article 180(2) of the Customs Act

Defendant 1 and four others

Busan District Court Decision 69No542 delivered on February 17, 1969

All appeals are dismissed.

80 days, out of the days pending trial after the appeal by Defendant Kim Jong-sik, shall be included in the principal sentence.

The defendant and his defense counsel's grounds of appeal are also examined.

It is reasonable to view that the Defendants were exempted from customs duties under Article 180(2) of the Customs Act even in the above case, regardless of the circumstances, if the Defendants were to use the goods for export as raw materials with the intention of using them for purposes other than the designated purposes, and if they were disposed of in the course of sale after filing an import declaration with the authorities, they would be offered as security, and only when they were produced and exported with the raw materials within the prescribed period after importation, they would be exempted from customs duties. The court below's decision to the effect that the Defendants were exempted from customs duties under Article 180(2) of the Customs Act is justifiable and there is no illegality in interpreting the legal principles as to the terms and conditions of the Civil Act under Article 180Na186 of the Customs Act and its application. According to evidence cited by the court below, the court below's decision to acknowledge that the Defendants were exempted from customs duties under Article 80 of the Customs Act, including those of the court below's 20th anniversary of the fact that they were sentenced to a fine for violating the provisions of the law, and there were no grounds for appeal.

This decision is consistent with the opinions of the involved judges.

The presiding judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge)