The part against Defendant A is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

1. As to the grounds of appeal against Defendant A, “for-profit purposes” as prescribed by Article 8-2(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Special Crimes Act”) refers to the purpose of obtaining wide economic benefits (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do13342, Feb. 11, 2010; 2010Do7289, Nov. 11, 2010); and the purpose of obtaining the refund of value-added tax unfairly by submitting a list of individual tax invoices by seller stating false information is to obtain the refund of value-added tax.

The judgment below

According to the reasoning and the record, Defendant A submitted a list of total tax invoices by seller, stating the supply price of goods or services in an amount equivalent to KRW 3,598,662,219 from the above companies, even though there was no fact that he received goods or services from G and H, as stated in the facts charged, in order to have the F, a corporation that he manages, deducts the input tax amount unfairly. In light of the above legal principles, the above act by Defendant A shall be deemed to constitute the act committed for the purpose of profit-making under Article 8-2 (1) of the Act on Special Cases.

Nevertheless, even if the lower court construed “for profit-making purposes” as “the purpose of acquiring personal economic benefits” under Article 8-2(1) of the Aggravated Punishment Act, the lower court, on the premise that the purpose of submitting a false list of individual tax invoices by seller to the Government should be excluded from “the purpose of submitting a false list of individual tax invoices by seller to the Government” should be “if there is any tax evasion or tax refund, and any other direct or indirect economic benefits are not obtained,” but it does not constitute a crime of violation of Article 8-2(1) of the Aggravated Punishment Act and Article 10(3)3 of the Aggravated Punishment Act.