When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The Defendant was a real representative of C Co., Ltd. in Gangnam-gu Seoul High Ground Group B.

No one shall be issued or issued a tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act without supplying or being supplied with goods or services.

1. On January 10, 2014, the Defendant issued a false tax invoice with each content written in three copies, although the Defendant did not supply goods or services equivalent to the respective value indicated in the table 1 to D.

D. D. D. D. 20,000,000 on December 20, 2013, 2012, 16, 2013.20,000 on December 16, 2013, for the supply value (cost) supplier (cost) on the date of preparation of the annual number of No. 1, 30,000 " "〃 10,000,000 on December 26, 2013.

2. The Defendant received a false tax invoice on January 10, 2014, even though he did not receive any goods or services equivalent to the value as indicated in the table 2 from the Plaintiff, he received three copies of a false tax invoice stating the same.

C. The summary of the evidence 〃 80,000,000 on December 16, 2013, 2013, the supply value of which as of December 16, 2013, as of the date of preparation of the annual number of No. 2, 120,000,000 on December 20, 2013, " "" 〃 100,000 on December 26, 2013.

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of accusation, electronic tax invoices, investigation reports (related to D);

1. Article 10 (3) and 1 of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (Amended by Act No. 16108, Dec. 31, 2018);

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act or above;