A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles: In light of the fact that the defendant submitted the evidence that corresponds to his own argument at the stage of the original trial with respect to the portion not guilty (the submission of a false list of total tax invoices by customer), the above evidence shall not be deemed credibility, but there is an error of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles

B. Unreasonable sentencing: The remaining parts except the part on which the lower court acquitted the Defendant as well as the remaining parts on the sentencing (a fine of six million won for each of the Defendant) are too unjustifiable.

2. Determination

A. Even based on all evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the judgment of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, it cannot be recognized that the defendants prepared a false list of total tax invoices against each of the above transaction parties without being supplied goods or services from M, I, and N, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

B. The Defendants’ decision on the assertion of unfair sentencing is not that the case is less complicated when the transaction value that was issued or falsely issued in the name of G Co., Ltd. was 8.10 million won in total.

However, the sentencing of the lower court seems reasonable in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendants led to the instant case in the course of running the business by lending the G Co., Ltd.; (b) the Defendants paid the tax imposed in the future of G Co., Ltd.; and (c) Defendant A’s occupation, age, character and conduct

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