A. In light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime and the benefits acquired by committing the instant crime were not much high, the sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment and fine of nine billion won) is too unreasonable.

B. In view of the fact that the prosecutor Defendant evaded taxes by submitting a false list of total tax invoices (hereinafter “lists of total tax invoices”), and acquired economic benefits, the sentence imposed by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s defense counsel for ex officio determination of the facts charged in this case was without a tax official’s accusation on the date of the third trial of the appellate trial, and thus, the judgment dismissing the prosecution should be pronounced. However, such assertion is added after the lapse of the period for filing the appeal, and thus it does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal

We examine ex officio whether the indictment of this case is legitimate prior to the judgment on the assertion of unreasonable sentencing by the defendant and prosecutor.

1) The Commissioner of the National Tax Service, the commissioner of a regional tax office, or the head of a tax office (hereinafter “tax official”) shall serve as the offenses under the Punishment of Tax

Article 21 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and Article 16 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes stipulate only the crimes under Articles 6 and 8 of the same Act that may be prosecuted in the absence of any accusation or accusation, and do not stipulate the crimes under Article 8-2.

Therefore, in order to prosecute a person who violates Article 8-2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, a tax official's accusation is necessary.

On the other hand, an accusation is an expression of intent demanding prosecution on the facts constituting an offense and its effect is recognized as identical to the facts stated in the accusation.