1. Whether the corporation continues to exist in its capacity under the Criminal Procedure Act, where a registration for the completion of liquidation of the company has been made during trial on the defendant in violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act;

2. Where a corporate company fails to pay corporate taxes, the responsibility under Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act of the representative who is a natural person;

1. Where a registration for the completion of liquidation of a company has been made during the trial of the defendant in violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the delinquency in corporate tax during the existence of the company, the liquidation affairs of the company shall not be completed until the case is closed, and the ability of the corporation shall continue to exist

2. The representative director of a company is a juristic person who actually performs an act of tax payment, etc. and where the company is in arrears with taxes, he is a representative of a juristic person who actually performs an act of tax payment. Thus, the representative who is a natural person under Article 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act cannot be exempted from the liability under Article 10 of the same Act as the offender,

Defendant 1 and one other

Attorney Lee Jong-soo (Presiding over the defendants)

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 75No345 delivered on July 9, 1975

All appeals are dismissed.

Judgment on Defendant 1’s grounds of appeal

If a corporation like the defendant company has completed the registration of the completion of liquidation, it shall be presumed that the corporation has lost its legal personality and lost its legal capacity as a party's ability and right, unless there are special circumstances. However, the default of corporate tax in this case is currently in the existence of the defendant company, and it is prosecuted upon an accusation by the head of the competent tax office, as the default of corporate tax has not been fully settled, and the defendant company's failure to pay corporate tax has been prosecuted during the trial of the court of the defendant case, even if the defendant company's default of liquidation has not been registered, the liquidation affairs of the defendant company cannot be terminated unless the defendant case is completed, and it is reasonable to interpret that the corporation's legal capacity still remains in the party's ability under the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judgment on Defendant 2’s ground of appeal

Article 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 1973, Nov. 29, 1967) provides that "When a representative of a corporation or an individual commits an offence under this Act in connection with the business or property of the corporation or individual, not only shall the offender be punished, but also the corporation or individual shall be punished by a fine under each Article," and Article 10 of the same Act provides that "where a taxpayer fails to pay taxes three or more times without justifiable cause, he shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than one year or a fine equivalent to delinquent amount," the representative of the corporation shall be punished by a fine and shall be punished by a fine to the business owner of the corporation in order to achieve the purpose of national revenue: Provided, That this case is that the defendant is the representative of the above defendant 1 corporation as the representative of the corporation, who actually performs the act of tax payment, etc., as the representative of the corporation, and the defendant shall be punished by a person who actually does the act of tax payment, etc., and this case shall not be punished by a misunderstanding of Article 104 of the above Act.

Therefore, the Defendants’ appeals are without merit, and each of them is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Han-jin (Presiding Justice)