logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.02.03 2015노4391
조세범처벌법위반등
Text

The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

The facts charged of this case.

Reasons

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. On July 25, 2010, among the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant filed a report on the first-term value added tax on the said B around July 25, 2010 with the representative director of the stock company B, and around July 25, 2010, the Defendant submitted a false list of invoices by sales office, stating the false supply price of goods or services, to H, even though there was no supply of goods or services.

B. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant, we examine this part of the indictment ex officio.

(1) The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Article 10(3)3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, which cannot be prosecuted without filing a complaint with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, or the head of the tax office, pursuant to Article 21 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.

(2) According to the records of this case, a written accusation submitted by the head of the relevant tax office to the head of the relevant tax office around November 2012 (No. 2, 46, and 47 of the investigation records No. 2013 type No. 94473) was stated to the effect that “it was in violation of Article 10(3)2 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act by issuing an invoice for processing KRW 34,000,000 to the Plaintiff in 2010, although it was issued and reported on a legitimate sales account when supplying the face-to-land goods,” and that “it was submitted to the Government by stating a list of invoices for each purchase place by purchase place under the Income Tax Act and the corporate tax laws,” and that there was no other evidence to acknowledge that there was no other evidence to acknowledge the facts charged.

(3) Accordingly, this part of the prosecution procedure is stipulated in the law.

arrow