특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(뇌물)
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of five years and a fine of 170,000,000 won.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine.
Punishment of the crime
After being appointed as a tax official on March 1, 1985, the Defendant is a person who was in charge of various tax investigations on individuals and corporations while working as a head of the E tax office from February 27, 2012 to December 4, 2013.
1. Around August 22, 2012, the Defendant received money and valuables related to the F’s tax investigation conducted an integrated tax investigation into F Company F (hereinafter “F”) with respect to the corporate entity, including the processing and sales investigation, and conducted an integrated tax investigation into the said company, and was in peace and friendship.
H Certified tax accountants were introduced to F, and F was appointed as a tax agent for the convenience of the above tax investigation.
Around that time, H received from F’s director I in charge of finance to the effect that “an investigation related to F’s J representative and K vice president’s transfer of stocks in the course of the tax investigation is well changed to F’s expense so that it does not proceed,” the H sent the above solicitation to the Defendant, and as a result, the F gave the Defendant KRW 80 million from F.
Accordingly, around September 6, 2012, H received shopping bags containing KRW 80 million in cash from H’s office under the aforementioned title from H to H. The Defendant received from H around 17:00 on the same day, shopping bags containing KRW 80 million in cash. The Defendant received from H the above office around 17:00 on the same day.
Accordingly, the defendant accepted a bribe in relation to the public official's duties.
2. On January 7, 2013, the Defendant received money and valuables related to the N Tax Investigation (hereinafter “N”) from NN (hereinafter “N”) and conducted a tax investigation, such as receipt of false tax invoice and additional value-added tax investigation, the Defendant introduced the said H tax accountant to N, and N appointed H as a tax agent for the convenience of the said tax investigation.
Around that time, H received N’s request from N’s vice president to the effect that “the tax official in charge would have completed the tax investigation well.”