beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years and by a fine of KRW 1,850,000.
Reasons
1. Progression of judgment and occurrence of final binding force;
A. According to the records of this case, the following facts can be acknowledged.
1) The prosecutor evaded the Defendant’s total income tax of KRW 3,624,40,690 in 208, while running a lending business from May 2, 201 to March 5, 2013, and received interest in excess of the limited interest rate. Although the Defendant received interest equivalent to KRW 37,287,02,67 in operating a lending business from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008, the prosecutor brought an action against the Defendant for violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Tax Offenses Act), and the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (Act No. 11,560,000 in total from around 208 to around 2012, and did not collect the source tax amounting to 25% from the previous owners as a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Tax Offenses and the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (Act).
2) As to the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, the lower court rendered a judgment of innocence by Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and found guilty of the remainder of the crime except for this, and sentenced 3 years of imprisonment and 3.7 billion won of fine.
3) The Defendant appealed against the lower judgment on the grounds of mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of legal principles, and the judgment prior to the remanding of the case cannot be accepted, but the Defendant’s allegation of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles cannot be accepted.
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the defendant shall be sentenced to 3 years of suspension of execution and 1.85 billion won of fine for 2 years of imprisonment, but the defendant shall be sentenced to 3.7 million won of daily conversion by applying Articles 70(1) and (2) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act.
4) Accordingly, the Defendant filed a final appeal against the judgment on the trial before remanding the Defendant not guilty, and the final appeal is justifiable to have convicted the Defendant of the part which was found guilty in the original trial before remanding the case, but the trial before remanding the case.