The Defendant agreed to exchange false tax invoices equivalent to the value-added tax amount equivalent to FF corporation and F corporation, instead of paying KRW 300 million, when the additional order was cancelled due to the failure to meet the performance of the asphalt plant which was completed, resulting in the need to return advance payment KRW 300 million to F corporation.

Accordingly, on October 24, 2012, the Defendant submitted a false list of total tax invoices by seller to F Co., Ltd., as if he supplied goods or services equivalent to KRW 985,00,000,000 in supply price to F Co., Ltd., upon filing a preliminary return of value added tax at the Silung Tax Office around October 24, 2012 for profit-making purposes, and submitted a false list of total tax invoices by seller from around that time to April 24, 2013, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table, as if he received goods or services equivalent to KRW 3,40,000,000 in total of supply price as shown in the list of crimes.

2. Determination

A. Legal doctrine 1) The crime under Article 8-2(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is merely the purpose of profit-making among the crimes under Article 10(3) and the former part of Article 10(4) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and the aggravated punishment where the total amount of supplied values, etc. exceeds a certain amount, and thus, it cannot be deemed that a new type of crime that is not regulated by the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act was newly established. Thus, unless otherwise provided by the Act, a prosecution may not be instituted unless there is a accusation by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, or the head of the tax office (hereinafter “the Commissioner of

In this regard, Article 16 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes exceptionally files a complaint or accusation.