All of the first and second original judgments shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

1. The first instance court rendered a not guilty verdict on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (False Tax Invoice) among the facts charged. Since the prosecutor does not dispute this part of the facts charged, the prosecutor asserted a mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to the acquittal portion of the reasons in the first instance judgment, but the prosecutor withdraws the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles on the fifth trial date ( August 17, 2015) of the first instance judgment, thereby leaving only the grounds for appeal.

The acquittal portion of the above reasons is found to have been exempted from the scope of attack and defense between the parties, while the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act was found guilty. Accordingly, the conclusion of innocence in the first instance judgment is followed, and it is not determined separately in the trial.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the crime of occupational embezzlement, Defendant 1 did not have conspiredd with P and this part of the crime, and did not know that the money was the purchase price of H’s goods.

B) In relation to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), in relation to the crime of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the issuance and issuance of false tax invoices, the Defendant committed the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), the Defendant committed an error of misconception of facts or of misunderstanding of legal principles that the first and second court found the Defendant guilty of all the criminal facts against the Defendant. 2) In relation to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Tax Evaders, the Defendant committed an unfair sentencing judgment (the first instance court: the imprisonment of four years, the second instance court: the imprisonment of four months) is too unreasonable.

B. The first instance court’s imprisonment (four years of imprisonment) shall be too unhued.