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

On June 16, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to the imprisonment without prison labor for 2 years, which was sentenced to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, by the Daegu District Court on June 24, 2009, and the judgment became final and conclusive.

The defendant is a person who is substantially operating Seogu Seo-gu, and D is under the direction of the defendant to send a false tax invoice issued by the defendant to Kwikset under the direction of the defendant.

No person shall make false entries in the list of total tax invoices by customer without supplying the goods or services under the provisions of the Value-Added Tax Act and submit them to the Government

Nevertheless, the Defendant conspired with D, on July 25, 2008, filed a final return on the value-added tax for C at the tax office of Seodaemun-gu located in the 2008 two-class 3 Dongs of Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, and submitted to the public official in charge of the said tax office a false list of total tax invoices by the seller, stating that the Defendant provided goods or services equivalent to KRW 247,611,00,000, total amount of KRW 120,000, KRW 35,000, KRW 300,000, and KRW 92,611,000, and KRW 247,61,000, even though there was no supply of goods or services equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol regarding D;

1. Written accusation (the director of the North Daegu Tax Office);

1. Total tax invoice by buyer;

1. A report on closure of investigation;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal and investigation experience data inquiry, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes ( Daegu District Court Decision 2008Meu4735);

1. Article 11-2 (4) 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 9919, Jan. 1, 2010); Article 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and the former part of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes;

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

1. The crime of this case in the sentencing ground of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order interferes with the securing of national tax revenues and the citizens’ sound awareness of tax payment.