The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged (excluding the part not guilty in the grounds for appeal) on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In so determining, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the elements for establishing a crime of tax evasion, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, as long as a case is not a case for which capital punishment or imprisonment with or without prison labor for life or for not less than ten years has been pronounced, the determination of whether the matters under Article 51 of the Criminal Act or the circumstances prior to the opening of the sentence belong to the discretion of the fact-finding court as to the determination of the sentence, it cannot be said that the court below did not defer the sentence of fine to

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles concerning the sum of fines in concurrent crimes of tax offense is not a legitimate ground for appeal, but a legitimate ground for appeal is not a legitimate ground for appeal since the court below was not subject to judgment ex officio, and further, even if ex officio examination is conducted, it did not err

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.