특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(허위세금계산서교부등)등
1. The part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A is reversed.
2. Defendant A’s imprisonment with prison labor for three years and a fine of 6.7 billion won.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that each sentence imposed by the court below on the defendants (the defendant A: 4 years of imprisonment, the fine of 6.7 billion won, the imprisonment of 2 years, the suspended execution of 3 years, the fine of 1.57 billion won) is too unreasonable.
2. The Defendants conspired and submitted a false list of total tax invoices to the government in a planned and organized manner that did not actually supply the waste glass, etc., Defendant A issued or received a false list of total tax invoices, and submitted a false list of total tax invoices to the government. In order to avoid such crime, the Defendants instigated the bomb or the president of the signboard company to conceal the crime.
The Defendants’ crime related to the tax is likely to seriously disrupt the tax order by making it difficult for the State to impose and collect taxes, and the burden is exceeded to the general public, thereby damaging the tax justice. Defendant A’s crime of perjury is likely to interfere with the discovery of substantial truth and undermining the judicial functions of the State, and thus, the quality of the crime is not easy.
Furthermore, the supply value of each aggregate tax invoice issued or issued by Defendant A and each aggregate tax invoice submitted to the Government by false entry is more than 60 billion won, and the supply value of the aggregate tax invoice submitted by Defendant B to the Government by false entry is more than 15 billion won.
In particular, Defendant A led to the crime while actually operating a wide carbon company and a signboard company appearing in the crime of this case.
Meanwhile, Defendants did not have any history of punishment for the same kind of crime, and Defendant A was sentenced to a suspended sentence or a heavier punishment.
The defendants recognize the defendants' mistakes and reflects them, and the profits actually acquired by the defendants due to the crime of this case are not significant.
Defendant
A. A.