특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(허위세금계산서교부등)
All appeals are dismissed.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, the lower court convicted Defendant A of the facts charged, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on intention.
According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing
Defendant
In this case where a minor sentence is imposed against A, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.
2. As to the Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, the lower court convicted Defendant B of the facts charged on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “total sum of supply values, etc.” under Article 8-2(1)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc.
Defendant
B argues to the effect that in the determination of sentencing by the lower court, the lower court erred by a fine excessively and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, contrary to the purport of the decision of the Constitutional Court or the handling of concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, it constitutes an assertion
However, as seen above, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where Defendant B was sentenced to a more minor sentence, the argument that the sentence is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.
3. Therefore, the conclusion is reasonable.