2. Determination

A. The crime of this case committed by Defendant A is favorable to Defendant A, in relation to the crime of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and the concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

However, each of the crimes of this case committed by Defendant A is easy to commit a crime in the issuance of a tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act without deceiving the victims of goods or services by deceiving them, and without supplying goods or services, and thus, the nature of the crime is not easy, and the total amount of damage in fraud reaches KRW 295 million, a significant portion of damage has not been recovered, and Defendant A has a record of being punished several times for the same crime, etc. under the unfavorable circumstances against Defendant A, and there is no change in special circumstances or circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, and there is no change in the sentencing, taking into account the following circumstances: Defendant A’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime was committed, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is excessively unreasonable.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion is rejected.

B. The degree of Defendant B’s participation is relatively not more severe, and the fact that Defendant B is a family member to support Defendant B is favorable to Defendant B.

However, the crime of this case was committed by Defendant B by deceiving the victim and taking property, and the nature of the crime is not less severe, the amount of damage reaches KRW 245 million, a significant portion of damage has not been recovered, and the crime of this case was committed during the period of suspension of execution of the same kind of crime.