However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[criminal power] On May 14, 2012, the Defendant was indicted for a non-detained crime in the support of the Jeonju District Court and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years and six months, and the appeal was dismissed on February 13, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 21, 2013.

【Criminal Facts】

The defendant is a petroleum retailer who operates a gas station in the name of the D gas station column in Jung-Eup Si.

Although the Defendant sold petroleum equivalent to 13,790 liters at the above gas station on or around December 2009 for the purpose of taxation, as if he sold the petroleum to farmers with tax-free oil, the Defendant had them pay 7,291,462 won, including traffic tax, etc., and received 85,636,350 won by selling 161,960 liters in the same way as in 2010, and unjustly refund 38,065,770 won by selling 71,992 liters from January 201 to March 2012, the Defendant received 8,79,986 won by unfairly receiving 139,793,568 won by selling 16,643 liters from March 2012. < Amended by Act No. 11393, Mar. 3, 2012>

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. E prosecutorial statement;

1. Evidential materials, such as an examination report, flow analysis report, and transaction pocket book;

1. Previous convictions: Criminal records, US records and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 4 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act concerning the crimes, and Article 4 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the amount of the pertinent tax refund is not significant, but there is no record that the Defendant was punished for the same crime. The entire amount of the tax refund due to the instant crime appears to be the amount of profit actually earned by the Defendant. The motive and background of the instant crime, the actual state of circulation of duty-free oil, or the criminal defendant.