The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In fact, misunderstanding of legal principles and omission of the sales declaration on scrap metal purchased from E, this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant evaded the value added tax for the second year of 2008 and the income tax for the second year of 2008 by omitting the sales declaration on scrap metal purchased from E, and that the Defendant sold this part of scrap metal in 208.

there is no evidence to determine the person.

In relation to the sale of scrap metal in this part, the defendant's failure to enter books, to issue a tax invoice, or to report the sale of the scrap metal has become the intention of active concealment.

As such, the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (wholly amended by Act No. 9919, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter the same) does not constitute “the act of fraud or other unlawful act” under Article 9(1) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.

The Defendant, while selling this part of scrap metal, did not issue tax invoices according to the other party’s intent and practice, and did not have any intention to evade tax.

(B) The charges on this part of the charges concerning the false receipt of the tax invoice for purchase of D Co. D (hereinafter “D”) are that the Defendant evaded the value-added tax of the second half of 2008 by receiving and reporting the false tax invoice from D. As such, since the instant indictment was instituted on May 28, 2019, which was ten years after the lapse of the statute of limitations from January 25, 2009, the date on which the report on the value-added tax was filed, the statute of limitations has expired.

2) The sentence of the lower court that was sentenced to an unfair sentencing (2 years of suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor, 3 years of suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor, and 80 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. Sentencing for prosecutor: The sentence of the lower court is too uneasible.

2. Determination on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant operated C in Busan Dong-gu B.

On January 25, 2009, the Defendant reported the value-added tax for C around 2008 on January 25, 2009, and (1) falsely received tax invoices from D.