logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.08.13 2014고정10
조세범처벌법위반
Text

Defendant

A and C shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5 million, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3 million.

The Defendants respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant committed Defendant B, around October 25, 201, ordered F companies located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, to file a return of value-added tax scheduled at the end of February 201 of the F company’s F company’s 201 with F companies: (a) although there was no fact that the F company operated the F company supplied goods or services equivalent to KRW 100,000,000 on the marine media; (b) provided goods or services equivalent to the same amount to the buyer’s buyer, as if the goods or services were supplied, submitted a false entry into the buyer’s list of crimes in attached Form 2 (1) and submitted a false statement to the Gangnam tax office for the buyer’s tax invoice.

2. Joint criminal conduct by Defendant A and Defendant C

A. At around October 25, 2011, the Defendants conspired to report the value-added tax for the F Company’s 201 year and 201 at the F Company’s 201, the Defendants submitted to the Gangnam Tax Office a false statement in the list of total tax invoices, including the submission of the false statement in the list of crimes (2) as if they were supplied goods or services equivalent to the same amount, although there was no fact that the F Company supplied goods or services to G Company’s 1,00,000 won.

B. On October 25, 2011, the Defendants conspired to report the value-added tax for the F Company’s 201 year and 201 at the F Company, and the F Company’s 201 return, the fact was submitted to the Gangnam Tax Office, in Gangnam, the list of total tax invoices entered in the list of total tax invoices by false entry in the list of total tax invoices as if they were supplied with goods or services equivalent to that amount of the total tax invoices and submitted to the Gangnam Tax Office, even though there was no fact that the F Company was supplied with goods or services equivalent to KRW 100,00,000 from the entertainment.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of the defendant A (as of the fourth trial date), the defendant B and C, respectively.

arrow