Each part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B Imprisonment with prison labor and fines of KRW 5,000,000.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants (Defendant A: six months of imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence, one year of suspended sentence, six months of imprisonment in the first instance court-6 months of suspended sentence, one year of suspended sentence, two years of imprisonment in the second instance court- six months of suspended sentence, one year of suspended sentence, one year of suspended sentence, and five million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal with respect to Defendant B, Defendant B filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing with respect to all the above appeal cases. As to each of the offenses against Defendant B in relation to concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment shall be imposed within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent offenses pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the part on Defendant B among the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. 피고인 A의 항소에 대한 판단 피고인 A이 범행을 자백하고 잘못을 반성하는 점, 피고인 현괍섭이 포탈한 세액이 모두 납부된 점, 피고인 A에게 동종 전과나 벌금형을 초과하는 형을 선고 받은 전력이 없는 점 등은 인정된다.

However, the instant crime committed, in collusion with Defendant A, evaded customs duties of KRW 63 million in total over a half-year period of time by reporting the import price lower in collusion with Defendant A, and such crime is an offense that undermines the securing of legitimate customs duties on the imported goods of the State, and is of importance in light of the fact that it is not good to commit a crime, and other circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing, such as Defendant A’s age, sexual conduct, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too too unreasonable.

4. In conclusion, there is a ground for reversal of the above part of the judgment of the court below as to Defendant B’s above, and thus, Defendant B’s unfair assertion of sentencing.