마약류에 대한 관세법상 통관검사 및 통제배달 관련 판례 평석 -통관검사 과정에서 취득한 물품 임의제출의 적법성을 중심으로-

Abstract

Customs clearance inspections and consequent narcotics discovery through controlled delivery have been steadily taking place, and consequently, cases of disputes over the legitimacy of each discovery are accumulating. This study examined a total of three cases among them. Daegu High Court 2016No323 decision(hereinafter referred to as the 'subject judgment') is the main research subject of this study. The subject judgment said that it was legal for customs officers to inspected cargo, took some samples, and analyzed ingredients even without a warrant because it was only an administrative investigation. But the subject judgment also said that customs officers should obtain a warrant because it was ‘seizure’ to occupy methamphetamine after the investigation began. In my opinion, such judgment is interpreted to the effect that the warrant principle should be applied retroactively even to the customs inspection before the start of the investigation. However, it is difficult to understand the explanation that the acquisition of possession of methamphetamine, which was already made before the investigation began, suddenly turns into confiscation even if the investigation was initiated at a certain point. I hope that discussions can be made from a new perspective on whether warrant requirement should be applied to continuing to occupy narcotics that have come to be occupied by customs inspection.