For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, and determined that each crime of this case does not constitute a single comprehensive crime, since it cannot be recognized that there was a single and continuous criminal intent to commit a crime committed in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (issuance, etc. of False Tax Invoice) with the Busan High Court as indicated in the judgment of the lower court, and since the legal interest in the two cases is identical or substantial relationship with each

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of logic and experience and by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on blanket crimes

On the other hand, the argument in the grounds of appeal that the court below erred by exceeding the discretion of sentencing is ultimately an unreasonable sentencing argument.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable and the argument that

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.