조세범처벌법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant is a crime listed in the annexed list (1) 1, 2 of the judgment of the court below.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (exemption from punishment) is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. The judgment was rendered on March 31, 201 by the Defendant, who was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of two years on the six-month period of imprisonment with prison labor on the extension of the Suwon Franchisium, and the decision was made on November 3, 201. On June 20, 2014, the Seoul High Court sentenced three years of imprisonment with prison labor and three years of imprisonment with prison labor on the grounds of a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) at the Seoul High Court's High Court's Decision on June 28, 2014. On April 23, 2015, the judgment became final and conclusive on May 1, 2015, by being sentenced to two months of imprisonment with prison labor and one month of imprisonment with prison labor on the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders in the Gwangju District Court's Branch Branch Support, the Defendant's crime in this case and the crime in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), and the Punishment of Tax Act should be recognized in consideration of equity.
However, the crime of each of the judgments rendered on November 3, 2011 and June 28, 2014 is irrelevant, and it is not necessary to take special consideration by completely changing the form of the instant crime and the act in the event of a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), fraud, forgery of private documents, or the instant investigation document.
On May 1, 2015, the crime of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, which became final and conclusive on May 1, 2015, refers to the issuance of a false tax invoice related to D Co., Ltd., and the issuance of a false tax invoice without transaction of goods or services at the same time as the instant crime was committed. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider the case where the judgment was rendered simultaneously in sentencing of the instant
However, unlike the above final and conclusive judgment, the crime of this case, unlike the above final and conclusive judgment, submitted a list of total tax invoices by customer and a list of total tax invoices by customer by customer with false entries, and thus, the defendant is identical to each other.