If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

The Defendant is a person who operated a limited liability company D (mutually limited liability company E prior to the change) located in Gwangju-gu Seoul from January 2010 to September 2011.

No one shall issue a tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act without supplying any goods or service.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, at the above company’s office, provided that the above company is supplied with supplier, Napopool Spool, Co., Ltd., and issued a false tax invoice of KRW 47,00,000 as if it supplied used cars (F) equivalent to the supply price of KRW 47,00,000, around March 24, 2010; one false tax invoice of KRW 1; and one false tax invoice of KRW 29,181,818, as if it supplied used cars (H) equivalent to the supply price of KRW 29,181,818, around June 11, 2010.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's statement on the fourth trial date in court;

1. The entry of some of the witness I in the third protocol of trial;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a copy of tax invoice (Evidence No. 116 pages, No. 118 pages);

1. Relevant provisions of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act concerning the facts constituting the crime and Article 10 (3) 1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Article 20 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (1.2 million won, each of the tax invoices for F and G, and 60 million won, each of the tax invoices for H);

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the amount of fine shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the following: (a) the defendant's mistake is recognized for the sentencing reason of Article 334(1) of the Provisional Payment Order; (b) the defendant appears to have long profit from the crime of this case; and (c)