According to the evidence at the time of the judgment of the court below, the facts constituting the above defendant are recognized as lawful and there is no violation of law of misunderstanding of facts due to the violation of the rules of evidence or incomplete deliberation, such as the theory of lawsuit, and even after examining the records, there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles as to non-taxation practices affecting the judgment, omission of judgment, lack of reasoning, etc., and the judgment of party members in the lawsuit, etc. are different from the facts of this case, and it is not appropriate to this case. Thus, the judgment of the

2. Defendant 2’s grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the evidence at the time of the decision of the court below, the facts constituting the crime against the above defendant are duly recognized, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts due to the violation of the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, and the reinforcement evidence of confession is sufficient not only to be a processed fact but also to the circumstantial evidence or indirect evidence, so the evidence at the time of the decision of the court below is sufficient. Thus, there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the evidence such as the theory of lawsuit in the decision of the court below. Further, the court below's decision that the so-called "Defendant 2 who evaded the national tax at the time of the original decision in collusion with the defendant 1, constitutes Article 9 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act by unlawful means such as the time of the original decision is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, such as the theory of lawsuit

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)