2. The crime of this case, even though the Defendant did not supply goods or services, issued a false tax invoice of KRW 1.932 million in total, despite the fact that the Defendant did not supply the goods or services, is recognized as favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized the crime of this case and against himself, and that there was no record of punishment.

However, it is difficult to view that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable in light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s false value of supply; (b) the Defendant appears to have received KRW 100 million from the counterpart company to whom a false tax invoice was issued; and (c) the Defendant’s profits derived from the instant crime are significant; and (d) the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Commission of the Supreme Court (the scope of recommendations for the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act: between October and February; and (e) the result of the application of the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Commission of the Supreme Court (the period of recommendations for the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act: (a) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive for the crime, and circumstances after

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.