beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years and a fine for 4.6 billion won.
However, the above imprisonment for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Delivery, etc. of False Tax Invoice) was aware that, since the market price of the closed Gu Ri is relatively high compared to that of the general scrap metal at KRW 8,000 or KRW 10,000 per 1 km, the Defendant was aware of the fact that, by abusing the fact that high-value added tax is large volume of waste glass, it trades large amounts of waste glass, but trades cash in order not to pay value-added tax, and conceals transactions by failing to keep evidentiary materials.
In addition, the Defendant, as seen above, should issue a normal tax invoice to the manufacturers, exporters, etc. even if the closed interest is traded in voice. As such, if the supply is made in a certain distribution phase, the Defendant purchased the closed interest with non-data without a tax invoice (non-purchase deduction). In selling the closed interest, it was well known that the Defendant made an appearance to issue all the sales tax invoices so that the seller can obtain the deduction of value-added tax in a normal manner, and that there is no choice but to require a "explosion business operator" to be subject to all criminal liability for tax evasion.
In the first period C in 2013, the facts together with C, E, F, and G are as follows: (a) the Defendant purchased a large amount of non-defluence from the influencies in H “I”; and (b) issued a false tax invoice of sale from June 5, 2013 to July 10, 2013, as shown in the attached Table of Crimes (1.55,353,370 won in total to the “B” in the above “D,” even though there was no substantial permanent closure transaction in the name of “D” in the name of “D,” etc. in the name of “B,” etc., of the Republic of Korea, even though there was no substantial permanent closure transaction, a false tax invoice of sale was issued from June 5, 2013 to “B,” as shown in the attached Table of Crimes (1).
Ultimately, the Defendant, in collusion with the above C, is the sum of supply values for profit.