2. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties to the judgment, the crime of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act is an offense that disturbs the sound order of commercial transactions and seriously undermines the national tax administration, and thus, requires strict punishment. The total amount of false tax invoices issued by the Defendant reaches about 12.5 billion won, and the amount of crime is considerably large, and the crime of gambling is highly harmful to the general public, such as encouraging excessive gambling spirit and failure in home economy, and thus, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant.

However, all of the crimes of this case are recognized by the Defendant, and there is no other punishment force except the punishment imposed due to the violation of the Automobile Management Act on around 2001, and the Defendant borrowed his name to D and received monthly salary. In fact, there is not sufficient data to deem that D had led to the crime of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, and that there is no money used for the crime of this case has been led by the Defendant.

In full view of all the circumstances surrounding the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relation, occupation and environment, the circumstances and result of each of the instant crimes, etc., and the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and pleadings, the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, each of the Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. The appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor with the conclusion are all dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.