When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is a representative of D who mainly engages in interior interior decoration, etc.

On September 3, 2014, at the D office located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, the Defendant prepared one copy of the tax invoice stating the date of issuance as “(i) September 3, 2014; (ii) supplier(D; (iii) supplier(s); (iv) supplier(s); and (iv) supply price as “120,000,000 won”; and (iv) around October 4, 2014, the Defendant issued to G one copy of the tax invoice stating “H member(s)”, “D”; and (iv) supplier(s) supplier(s) supply price as “70,000,000 won.”

However, even though the Defendant did not perform the human body work in F and H Council members, the Defendant issued tax invoices stating the aforementioned false information upon the G’s request, even though he did not perform the human body work of two hospitals.

The Defendant, without providing such a service, issued two copies of false tax invoices causing 190 million won in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written accusation;

1. Application of tax invoice Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and Article 10 (3) 1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and the selection of fines concerning the crime;

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

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;