logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.09.17 2018노3210
조세범처벌법위반
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, upon the request of G, lent only the name of the business operator of the “C gas station” as indicated in the lower judgment (hereinafter “instant gas station”) to G, and did not actually operate the said gas station. Moreover, the competent tax office did not submit a list of total tax invoices by false seller in relation to the instant gas station.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of KRW 10 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the owner of “C gas station” in Pyeongtaek-si B.

No person shall submit to the Government a list of total tax invoices by seller under the Value-Added Tax Act, without being supplied with goods or services, by entering it falsely.

Nevertheless, on January 25, 2012, the Defendant reported the value-added tax on the 2nd time in 2011 on the Pyeongtaek-si gas station located at Pyeongtaek-si 6, which was located in Pyeongtaek-si 6, the Defendant submitted a list of total tax invoices by false seller, stating as if he was supplied with goods or services equivalent to KRW 237,770,90,09 without being supplied with goods or services from D.

B. The lower court determined that the Defendant was actually operating the instant gas station in light of the legal statements, etc. of E and F, and found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

(c)

1) In a criminal trial, recognition of facts constituting a crime ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads to a judge to have a reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that such conviction would lead to the prosecutor’s above conviction, it should be determined as a defendant’s interest even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable.

Supreme Court on June 28, 2012

arrow