beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of reasons for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of the Act);
A. According to evidence, it is recognized that the KAF and the KAF have created and paid the appearance of the exchange of money in mutual circulation in order to issue a tax invoice without substance.
(b) the issuance of a tax invoice in the form of sale, even though the parties supplied processed services, constitutes a false tax invoice based on the most invalid act.
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court from February 2013 to August 2, 201, it is recognized that: (a) the Defendant, the representative director of the Plaintiff, was supplied with the product that he completed the first process from the LUG (hereinafter “G”); and (b) the Defendant supplied the product that he completed the second process to the LUF (hereinafter “F”) in relation to the said transaction with each purchase or sales invoice (hereinafter “the instant tax invoice”); and (c) there was each financial transaction statement corresponding to the instant tax invoice; and (d) there is a balance between the product quantity supplied by G E and the product quantity supplied by E to E.F.
According to the above facts, there is objective data on the fact that E made a transaction corresponding to the instant tax invoice between G and F, and receiving the price of the goods supplied by E from F and paying the price of the goods supplied by E to G is a natural consequence of the aforementioned transaction structure. As such, it is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that each transaction with E and F was a false processing transaction with no substance, solely on the ground that F management created funds through an unlawful method, such as creating the appearance of the processing transaction, repeated acquisition, and repeated crimes of tax evasion, as argued by the prosecutor, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently.
Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's assertion is.