However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

From around 2011, the Defendant had already operated a container and retail business with the name of “E”, and had not issued tax invoices for some sales transactions, and had been paid the sales amount to the name account in the name of the Defendant’s Chok’s name, and had the intent to evade taxes by immediately destroying the specifications, etc. received in the course of the transaction without preparing the relevant account books.

1. On January 25, 2012, the Defendant evaded the value added tax amounting to KRW 59,838,832 by omitting a report of sales amounting to KRW 59,832 by filing a report of sales amounting to KRW 59,835,460 in the Dongyang Tax Office located in Ansan-si on February 25, 2012, from that time until January 25, 2015, by fraud or other unlawful act from that time, including by omitting a report of sales amounting to KRW 59,838,832.

2. Around May 31, 2012, the Defendant evaded the total amount of income tax of KRW 464,031,266 by omitting a return of the amount of income equivalent to KRW 158,54,434 in the same manner in the same way as above while filing a report of the total income tax in the same way at the Ansan Tax Offices listed in the foregoing paragraph (1) around May 31, 2012, from that time until May 31, 2015, by fraud or other unlawful act, from that time, the Defendant evaded the total amount of income tax of KRW 415,358,294 in four times, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table 2.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A written accusation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on account transactions;

1. Relevant provisions of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act concerning the facts constituting the crime and Article 3 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. The sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing is more favorable) is due to the suspended sentence - the unfavorable circumstances: the period of the crime, the size of evaded tax amount, etc. are considered.