The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

(2) the date of this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The purpose of being provided convenience in raising funds for the misapprehension of the legal doctrine was to change the H Co., Ltd. to P (A).

A false tax invoice is issued from “H” rather than before and after the mutual change (hereinafter referred to as “H”), and there was no intention to evade value added taxes.

B. The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and fine of KRW 840 million) is too unreasonable.

2. (1) There is intention to commit the crime of escape from a tide cell as stipulated in Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.

In order to obtain a refund of the purchase tax amount by false tax invoice, other than the awareness that the Defendant is entitled to a refund of the purchase tax amount by false tax invoice, the following must be recognized: (a) in full view of the following circumstances: (b) whether the Defendant would have obtained a deduction of the purchase tax amount by false tax invoice; (c) whether the lower court recognized and investigated lawfully by the trial court; and (d) the evidence duly adopted and examined by the Defendant; and (c) the financial transaction information statement, recognized as the result of each order to submit a return on the purchase tax amount by false tax invoice, and received a refund of the sales tax amount after fully paying the sales tax amount on the above false tax invoice; and (d) whether the Defendant would have obtained a deduction of the purchase tax amount by false tax invoice, thereby resulting in the reduction of the national tax revenue (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do527, Apr. 28, 201).