All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court on the grounds of the Defendants’ appeal that the Defendants cannot be deemed to have received the processed tax invoice or not to have received the tax invoice, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendants guilty of both of the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the issuance of the processed tax invoice among the instant facts charged, the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the receipt of the processed tax invoice, and the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders due to the receipt of the processed tax invoice. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the logical and empirical rules and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

2. In the event that the Defendants’ grounds for appeal disputing the amount of evaded tax are reduced by falsely preparing or concealing books and other documentary evidence related to revenue and expenditure in the crime of escape from cells or by increasing the expenses for expenditure, it cannot be said that it is necessary to collect certain evidence to acknowledge only one of the facts constituting each item of revenue or expenditure, which serves as the basis for calculating the amount of evaded tax. In such a case, it is objective and reasonable that the method can be generally acceptable, and if the outcome is highly probable and correct (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do16164, Feb. 26, 2015). The lower court calculated the unit price ratio by type of D, R, AI, AJ, and J, which is a marine oil supplier whose actual purchase price has been verified, and the timing and timing of purchasing the Defendants and the aforementioned purchasing companies.