조세범처벌법위반
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is not that of the defendant staying in a foreign country for the purpose of escaping criminal punishment, so the statute of limitations has not been suspended during the period of overseas stay, and the statute of limitations in the instant case
2. In the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of judgment, the tax investigation was commenced on November 13, 2006 on the grounds of suspicion of excessive sales compared to the type or purchase of the business of the instant company, and on the grounds of sudden change in sales in February 2005, and this was conducted on November 13, 2006. At the time, the Defendant was prior to leaving the Republic of Korea on December 19, 2006, the Defendant was operating the company with the actual interest of the representative director on the registration, and the Defendant was deemed to have been notified of the matters regarding the tax investigation. Around May 207, a report made immediately after the tax investigation was conducted on May 200, the E (State), the representative of E (State) who was the trade name before November 206, the initial date of the tax investigation, visited Korea, and responded to the submission of relevant evidence of transaction.
In light of the fact that the defendant's mobile phone number is also specified in the "as the contact is terminated after leaving the country," and the "representative of the former E (the state)" among them appears to be an expression made because the representative was not changed in the registration of the business operator unlike the corporate registry, and the defendant's mobile phone number is also specified in the above report, the possibility that the defendant would be punished by issuing the tax invoice of this case at the time of leaving the country, and did not return to the same country after leaving the country to avoid the punishment.
In recognition of criminal punishment, the statute of limitations is not suspended only when the defendant stays abroad for the sole purpose of escaping criminal punishment.
Since the statute of limitations is suspended for the period of prosecution that the defendant left the Republic of Korea on December 19, 2006 and stayed abroad before entering the Republic of Korea on March 15, 2017, the statute of limitations for the crime of this case prosecuted on July 27, 2017 has not expired.
Since the judgment below to the same purport is justified, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.
3. The appeal by the defendant is in conclusion.