The Supreme Court ruled that a "real doll" that customs refused to clear is not an item that harms public morals and therefore must be sent to the purchaser.
The Supreme Court's First Division (Justice Shin Sook-hee) said on Mar. 3 that it affirmed a lower court ruling that canceled a customs clearance hold in an appeal filed by A Co. against the head of the Gimpo Airport Customs over the disposition to withhold import clearance, concluding the case on Feb. 26.
A real doll is a doll modeled after the human body. There are Namsung real dolls for men as well, but most are in the form of women and are often used as adult products.
Company A, which exports and imports healthcare products, declared to Gimpo Airport Customs ("customs") in Mar. 2020 that it would import three real dolls. Customs then withheld clearance for the three real dolls based on the review results of the adult product customs clearance review committee. Company A requested the Korea Customs Service to review the cancellation of the disposition to withhold import clearance, but the Korea Customs Service dismissed the request in Dec. of the same year.
Under the Customs Act, customs may withhold the clearance of "books, publications, drawings, films, records, videotapes, sculptures, or other goods of a similar nature that disturb the constitutional order or harm public safety, order, or public morals." The clearance review committee determined that real dolls are "items that harm public morals," and customs accordingly blocked their entry into Korea.
The first trial ruled that customs must cancel the disposition withholding Company A's real doll clearance. The first-instance panel said, "It is unlawful to base the judgment that it harms sexual morals solely on the appearance without fully considering the space where the item is used, the surrounding environment, the user, and the purpose."
It also found that "even if (a real doll) is used as a sex device, it may be legally permissible if its use is limited to an adult's private space."
Customs appealed, but the appellate court dismissed the appeal. The appellate panel said, "Viewed as a whole, the item gives a fairly vulgar and disorderly impression, but it cannot be said to so blatantly express or depict sexual parts or acts as to be assessed as seriously damaging or distorting human dignity and value."
Customs again appealed, but the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. The Supreme Court found that the lower court did not misunderstand the interpretation or application of the Customs Act or the legal principles concerning obscenity.