Where a entertainment business entity pays the tax base amount determined again by the tax authorities after a false report, whether there is a liability under Article 9 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.

Where a false return on any tax base that serves as the tax base for an entertainment business operator is filed, even if the tax authorities have determined a tax base higher than the reported amount and paid it accordingly, if the tax base determined by the tax authorities is insufficient for the actual sales of the enterprise, the liability for the crime of tax evasion as provided in Article 9 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act shall not be exempted with respect to the tax due to the difference.

Article 9 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act

Defendant 1 and one other

Attorney Kim Jong-sik (as regards the defendants, national election)

Daegu High Court Decision 76No1240 delivered on September 7, 1978

The appeal is dismissed.

1. The Defendants’ grounds of appeal and the Defendants’ grounds of appeal on the attorney Kim Jong-sik

As to ground of appeal No. 1:

The gist of the grounds of appeal is that as long as the tax authorities determine the tax base on the grounds that the tax base reported by the Defendants is unreasonable, the Defendants may not be liable for the crime of evading taxes.

However, when a person operating an entertainment business files a report on the sales of the enterprise, which serves as the tax base for entertainment and food taxes, defense taxes, personal business taxes, etc. imposed on the business, to the tax authorities, the tax authorities filed a report by reducing the sales amount in order to evade the tax, and the tax authorities determined the tax base higher than the reported tax base amount and paid the tax accordingly, even if the tax base amount is unreasonable, if the tax base determined by the tax authorities falls short of the actual sales amount of the above enterprise, the decision on the same purport that the tax base amount determined by the tax authorities shall not be exempted from the liability for the crime of evading the tax as provided in Article 9 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, in relation to the difference in the case where the tax base amount determined by the tax authorities is insufficient to meet the actual sales amount of the above enterprise.

2. As to the Defendants’ Second Ground of Appeal:

In the event that both imprisonment and a fine are concurrently imposed, the sentence of a suspended sentence of imprisonment shall be imposed and the sentence of a fine shall not be deemed unfair by setting the period of a suspended sentence of imprisonment without taking any measure to suspend the execution of the sentence.

In the case of the concurrent imposition of imprisonment with prison labor and fines, if the suspension of execution is sentenced, the sentence of the suspension of the execution of the imprisonment shall also be sentenced, and it shall not be employed unfairly.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Ahn Byung-soo (Presiding Justice) (Presiding Justice)