A. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are limited to the formal representative director of Defendant C’s farming association corporation (hereinafter “Defendant C”), and Defendant B issued or received each tax invoice, such as the tax invoice (hereinafter “each of the tax invoices of this case”) in the judgment of the court below, and Defendant A did not have any participation in the tax.

Nevertheless, the lower court convicted Defendant A of the facts charged by misunderstanding facts or understanding the legal doctrine.

B) The lower court’s sentence (10 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service order) against Defendant A is too unreasonable and unreasonable. (2) Defendant C’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine are not liable for violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act since it is impossible for Defendant C to control and supervise the business that Defendant C issued or issued a processed tax invoice. Nevertheless, the lower court determined that Defendant C was guilty of the facts charged against Defendant C by erroneous understanding of facts or by erroneous understanding of legal principles. (B) The lower court’s sentence (2) against Defendant C of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the following circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, Defendant A may be sufficiently recognized that each of the instant tax invoices was issued or received by the Defendant A in collusion with Defendant B. Thus, this part of the allegation by Defendant A is without merit.

1. Defendant A shall be the representative director of the N in the corporate register of the fishery partnership corporation established around March 2013.