특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(허위세금계산서교부등)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants [the sentence imposed by Defendant A: 8 months of imprisonment; 2 years of suspended execution; Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”): fine of KRW 10 million; and suspended sentence] is too unfasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. Each of the crimes of this case with regard to the determination of the unfair assertion of sentencing is that Defendant A, the representative director of Defendant B, submitted a false list of the invoices by seller at around 17 years without supplying or receiving goods or services to E and H fishing village fraternities, etc., and the crime is not likely to be committed. The crime of this case is a large amount of KRW 4.4 billion in total, and the purchase amount recorded falsely on the list of the invoices by seller is large amount of KRW 4.4 billion. The crime related to the false tax invoice is a serious crime that seriously disturbs tax order by making it difficult for the State to impose and collect taxes, thereby damaging the tax justice, as well as undermining the sound order of commercial transactions, and thus, there is a need to strictly punish the Defendants.
On the other hand, Defendant A recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected his mistake. A significant part of each of the crimes of this case appears to have stated the purchasing place in response to the request for the intermediate transaction of fishery products that actually traded with Defendant B passively. It appears that the Defendants paid all the gold and additional charges imposed by the Defendants. Defendant A did not have any record of punishment exceeding the same kind of crime or fine, which is favorable to the Defendants.
위와 같은 사정들과 그 밖에 피고인 A의 나이, 성 행, 환경, 범행의 동기, 수단과 결과, 범행 후의 정황 등 변론에 나타난 모든 양형조건 및 대법원 양형 위원회 제정 양형기준의 권고 형량 범위 ◈ 법률상 처단형의 범위 피고인 A: 징역 1월 ~ 4년 6월 피고인 B: 벌금 50,000원...