We reverse the judgment of the first instance court.

Defendant

A The fine of KRW 5,00,000, and the defendant corporation B shall be punished by fine of KRW 3,000,000.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal

A. In fact, misunderstanding of legal principles (i.e., a derivative model that has the same safety certification number as the basic model is classified as the same certification model and can obtain safety certification, and the derivative model type can not be known through search of information on certification issued by the certification body or on the homepage of the certification body, and it cannot be known that the product actually imported is a product different from the certification model stated in the certificate submitted at the time of import declaration.

Therefore, there was no intention on the Defendant’s importation of the pertinent product of the Safety Certification Number stated in the Electrical Appliances Safety Certification Form (Ⅰ). In the case of the product listed in the [Attachment 2-1] Nos. 3 of Article 2 of the Electrical Appliances and Consumer Products Safety Control Act (hereinafter “Electric Appliances Safety Control Act”) and Article 3(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, it is not an electrical product subject to the Safety Certification, but an electrical product subject to the Safety Certification Nos. 6-2 through 6-7, 17 through 19, 24-2, 25-1, 27-1, 27-2, 28-2, 32 or 34, the product is certified under Article 15 of the Industrial Standardization Act, and the product is not subject to the Safety Certification Number No. 3 of the Electrical Appliances Safety Control Act and the product is not subject to the Safety Certification No. 8 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act.

Even if there is no violation of Article 270(2) and Article 241(1) of the Customs Act (negative). (B) The sentence of first instance on sentencing (Defendant A: 2 years of suspended sentence in August, and Defendant B: 10 million won in fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination;