The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment is publicly announced.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

Co., Ltd. and E Co., Ltd. have provided waste disposal services to contractors as joint contractors.

Defendant

A stock company B and E shall not constitute a false tax invoice because they were issued or received two copies of tax invoices as stated in the judgment of the court below for the mutual settlement between joint contractors with respect to the portion of joint waste disposal services provided.

The judgment of the court below which pronounced guilty against the Defendants is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

Judgment

Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) is a corporation with the purpose of collecting and transporting construction waste in the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Cbuilding D, and Defendant A is the representative director of Defendant B.

No one shall issue or receive a tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act without the supply of goods or services.

1. Defendant A

A. A. On July 27, 2017, the Defendant received a false tax invoice (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) as if the supply price was supplied in an amount equivalent to KRW 63,9293,059, even though the fact at Defendant B’s office was not supplied with goods or services by E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”).

B. On September 1, 2017, the Defendant issued a false tax invoice (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) as if he provided services equivalent to KRW 48,915,351 of the value of supply, although the Defendant did not have supplied goods or services to Defendant B in the office.

2. The Defendant B received a false tax invoice from the representative director on the Defendant’s business at the time and place specified in paragraph (1).

The judgment of the court below No. 1-A.

The tax invoice stated in paragraph (1) shall be issued as of July 27, 2017, and the content thereof shall be deemed to be a stock company B.