(a) Time when any act of tax evasion in the value-added tax has been completed;

B. The meaning of "Fraud or other unlawful act" under Article 9 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act

A. Since value-added tax is a tax return method in principle, if the value-added tax is evaded, it shall be the amount of tax evasion at the time when the period of tax return expires under Article 9-3 (2) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act. Even if a part of the amount of tax evaded after the payment was made, it shall not affect the establishment of the crime of tax evasion.

B. Fraud and other unlawful acts stipulated in Article 9(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act refer to fraudulent or other active acts that make it impossible to impose and collect taxes, or significantly difficult to do so, and the mere failure to file a tax return under the tax law or filing a false tax return without accompanying any other acts is not deemed to constitute this. However, if an intermediary wholesaler of synthetic resin materials purchases synthetic resin materials without having a tax invoice issued without having a tax invoice kept or kept books without having a tax invoice issued and selling them without having a tax invoice issued, such acts cannot be deemed as active acts that make it impossible or considerably difficult to impose and collect taxes.

(a) Subparagraph 2 (b) of Article 9-3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act;

Defendant 1 and five others

Defendants

Attorney Park Jong-young (Law No. 1 and 2) et al., Counsel Park Jong-young ( Counsel for defendant 3)-appellee ( Counsel for defendant 4)

Seoul High Court Decision 84No47 delivered on April 6, 1984

All appeals are dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to each of the appeals by Defendant 4, 5, and 6:

According to the evidence of the first instance court cited by the judgment of the court below, the criminal facts can be fully acknowledged at the time of the original trial against the above defendants. The court below's decision that found the above defendants guilty is just, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts, such as the theory of lawsuit, and the reason that the sentencing is excessive in this case where a sentence of less than 10 years has been pronounced, cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal. Each argument is groundless.

2. As to Defendant 2’s appeal

According to the evidence of the first instance court cited by the judgment of the court below, since the facts constituting the crime can be fully acknowledged at the time of the original trial against the above defendant, the court below's decision that found the above defendant guilty is just, and there is no error of law such as the theory of lawsuit.

The issue is groundless.

3. As to Defendant 1’s appeal

According to the evidence of the first instance court cited by the judgment of the court below, the facts constituting the crime can be acknowledged at the time of the original trial against the above defendant. Thus, the court below's decision that found the above defendant guilty is just, and there is no error of law such as the theory of lawsuit.

In light of the provisions of Articles 18, 19, and 21 of the Value-Added Tax Act, it is clear that the value-added tax is based on the method of filing a return. Thus, in the case of evading value-added tax, the amount of tax evasion act at the time when the period of filing a return expires under subparagraph 2 of Article 9-3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act. Thus, even if a part of the amount of tax evaded after the payment deadline was made after the payment deadline, it can not affect the establishment of the crime of tax evasion, regardless of the fact that it

In the same view, the judgment of the court below which held that the crime of tax evasion is established on the whole amount of tax evaded at the time of the payment deadline is just and there is no violation of law such as the theory of lawsuit.

4. As to Defendant 3’s appeal

According to the evidence of the first instance judgment cited by the judgment of the court below, since the above defendant is an intermediate wholesale of synthetic resin, and the facts constituting the crime at the time of original adjudication are fully recognized, the measures which the court below found the above defendant guilty is just and there is no error of law such as the theory of lawsuit.

The act of fraud and other improper acts stipulated in Article 9(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act refers to fraudulent or other improper acts that make it impossible to impose and collect taxes or significantly difficult to do so, and the act of simply failing to file a tax return under the tax law or filing a false tax return without accompanying any other acts, does not constitute this. However, the above defendant's act does not constitute an active act that makes it impossible or considerably difficult to impose and collect taxes. However, the above defendant's act does not constitute an active act that makes it impossible to impose and collect taxes, or makes it difficult to do so when he/she files a false tax return. The above defendant purchased synthetic resin raw materials without being issued a tax invoice and sells them without being issued a tax invoice, and then did not make a final tax return.

Therefore, the court below's decision that found the above defendant guilty is just and there is no error of law such as the theory of lawsuit. The arguments are groundless.

Therefore, all appeals by the Defendants are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Jae-hee (Presiding Justice)