Supreme Court: Purchasing Agents Can Be Punished for Customs Act Violations If They Led the Import Process

A court has ruled that even a purchasing agent can be punished for violating the Customs Act if they were involved in customs clearance procedures and actually led the import process.

According to the legal community on May 7, the Supreme Court's Second Division (Presiding Justice Oh Kyungmi) on April 15 upheld a lower court ruling that sentenced Mr. A, who was indicted on charges of violating the Customs Act, to a suspended prison term. Mr. A, who operated an e-commerce retail business in both the United Kingdom and South Korea and sold goods through overseas direct purchases, was indicted for smuggling clothing worth approximately 1.3 billion won between 2021 and 2022 and for evading 20 million won in customs duties during this process.

According to the prosecution's investigation, when items purchased for personal use are valued at less than $150, express delivery companies can submit a customs clearance list to the customs office chief, allowing import declaration to be omitted. However, Mr. A submitted customs clearance lists by falsely claiming that the items purchased via overseas direct purchase were each valued at less than $150, in order to evade customs declaration and pocket the difference in customs duties.

Both the first and second trial courts found Mr. A guilty of violating the Customs Act and sentenced him to one year and six months in prison, suspended for three years. Mr. A argued that, according to the Customs Act, a purchasing agent cannot be the subject of a smuggling offense. However, the court determined that Mr. A was considered the importer since he oversaw the entire process from overseas purchase to customs clearance and domestic delivery.

Mr. A appealed the decision, but the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. The Supreme Court stated, "The punishment provisions of the Customs Act refer to a person who, by being actually involved in customs clearance procedures and taking the lead in decision-making regarding smuggling, effectively conducts the act of importation," and found that the lower court had not misunderstood the law.