특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(허위세금계산서교부등)
Defendant
All appeals filed by C and prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment as to Defendant C’s unfair assertion of sentencing, and the sentencing of the lower court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it shall be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s judgment on the grounds that the new materials of sentencing were not submitted in the instant case.
In addition, considering the factors of sentencing indicated in the records and arguments, including that A, the representative director of one defendant, has falsely recorded and submitted a list of the total sum of KRW 900 million in total, six times in total, the sentence of the court below against the defendant cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, even though considering all of the factors of sentencing in the court below, which are favorable to the defendant among the various factors of sentencing.
Defendant C’s assertion disputing the unreasonableness of sentencing of the court below is not accepted.
2. In full view of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant was excessively unfasible and thus, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, in light of the following: (a) in this case, the Defendant recognized his mistake and against the Defendant; (b) the Defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime; and (c) the Defendant appears to have no record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime; and (d) the profits acquired by the Defendant from the instant crime appears to have been less
shall not be deemed to exist.
Defendant
We do not accept the prosecutor's assertion that the court below's sentencing against A is unreasonable.
3. Conclusion, Defendant C and the Prosecutor’s appeal against Defendant A are dismissed on the grounds that they are without merit.