A. Although it was true that the defendant issued a false tax invoice by mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, it is merely a mere name, and it is not for profit-making purposes, Article 8-2 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes which requires profit-making purposes cannot be applied to the defendant's act, and only the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act can be applied to the defendant's act. Thus, the statute of limitations has expired for the crime committed before November 13, 2019, which is the date of the indictment of this case (No. 1

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged in the instant case erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the purpose and statute of limitations for profit, or by misapprehending the premise thereof.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court [one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, fine of KRW 1.50 million (50 billion of confinement for exchange), and order of provisional payment] is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles in the judgment of the court below also argued the same as the grounds for appeal in this part. As to this, the court below held that the "for profit" as provided by Article 8-2 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes means the purpose of widely obtaining economic benefits (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2010Do7289, Nov. 11, 2010; 2013Do5758, Sept. 24, 2014); and in light of the following facts and circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the defendant issued a false tax invoice to raise funds necessary for operating the business and funds for personal use, and that such purpose constitutes "for profit-making" as provided by Article 8-2 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, all of which constitute a comprehensive crime.