조세범처벌법위반
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The lower court’s sentence (6 months of imprisonment) against the Defendant (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.
B. The prosecutor (misunderstanding the facts and determining the amount of punishment) 1) misunderstandings the fact that the defendant accepted the Dispute Resolution and issued a large amount of false electronic tax invoice in the short period of two months, the defendant issued five copies of the tax invoice as stated in No. 2, 3, 22, 23, and 24 during the same period, and the defendant issued a false statement of tax invoice as stated in No. 2, 3, 22, 23, and 24 during the same period, and the security card necessary for issuing the electronic tax invoice, the official certificate, and H's statement that the corporate card was under the management of the defendant was under the management of the defendant.
Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant was not guilty of the electronic tax invoice part among the facts charged in the instant case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2) The lower court’s sentence against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination as to the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of the facts (only the list of offenses in attached Form 2 and 22 Nos. 2 and 22 of the list of offenses shall be corrected as “issuance of the processing tax invoice (electronic)” (e.g., correction).
The lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the Defendant was not directly involved in the issuance of each electronic tax invoice as stated in the facts charged in the lower judgment, and that the Defendant cannot be aware of who was involved in the issuance of the said electronic tax invoice.
In full view of the following circumstances admitted by the lower court and the first instance court based on the evidence duly admitted and examined, the circumstances cited by the prosecutor and the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone are proven without reasonable doubt that the Defendant issued tax invoices in this part.
It is difficult to see otherwise, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, so the prosecutor is erroneous.