The judge ruled that the general manager of a logistics company was exempted from fines because he failed to prove that he knew about the import of banned anti-wolf spray.

The judge believed that the address of the logistics company was public information and there was no positive evidence to prove that the goods were ordered by personnel of the logistics company. He ruled that the general manager of the logistics company, surnamed He, was exempted from punishment. (Photo by reporter Wu Shengru)

On July 15 this year, Keelung Customs of the Customs Service seized 768 anti-wolf spray devices imported from China without application from imported goods and reported them to the Keelung Port Police Corps for investigation. The police traced and found that the goods were sent to a logistics company. They determined that the company had violated the Social Order Maintenance Law and transferred it to the Keelung District Court for adjudication. The judge believed that the address of the logistics company was public information and there was no positive evidence to prove that the goods were ordered by personnel of the logistics company. He ruled that the general manager of the logistics company, surnamed He, was exempted from punishment.

Police investigation revealed that the goods were "gas sprayers (tanks)" among the gas equipment listed in the "Types and Specifications of Police Equipment Equipped by Police Agencies" issued by a letter from the Executive Yuan, and were declared prohibited equipment. It was a corporate company that entrusted a customs declaration company to declare customs and then sent it to the logistics company. Therefore, it was determined that the general manager of the logistics company named He was involved in violating the social order maintenance law, and he was transferred to the court for disciplinary action in accordance with the law.

Please read on...

When contacted, the general manager surnamed He argued that the goods were declared by a customs declaration company entrusted by a business community in central and southern China and had nothing to do with the company and were not commissioned by the company. Although the delivery address filled in for the goods was the same as the company's warehouse, this batch of goods had never been received at all, and he did not know why it was sent to the company.

The judge reviewed relevant information and found that the enterprise company that entrusted the customs declaration was not related to the logistics company, and the person who issued the customs declaration was not the logistics company. Although the shipping address and the consignee's contact number were the same as the director of the logistics company, the consignee was still the enterprise company that applied for customs declaration. It was difficult to identify the general manager of the logistics company as the person who actually imported the goods, so he ruled that no penalty would be imposed. Another 768 anti-wolf spray devices were banned and declared confiscated.

No need to draw, no need to grab. Now use the APP to read the news. You are guaranteed to win every day. Click me to download the APP. Click me to see the event details.