logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
부산지방법원 2018.08.24 2016고합709
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(조세)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months and by a fine not exceeding 150 million won.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Criminal facts

[2] On October 16, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) at the Busan District Court on October 5, 2013; October 21, 2013; on January 21, 2014; and on December 19, 2014, the judgment became final and conclusive on December 23, 2014, on the following grounds: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for the violation of the Act on Specialized in Finance in Busan District Court; (b) the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with labor for the violation of the Punishment of Tax Offenses Act; and (c) the judgment was finalized on August 31, 2016.

[2] The facts charged in the instant case are as follows: (a) the Defendant and C carried on the so-called “pro-open-open-open-

However, in light of the contents of the business indicated in the indictment, the Defendant and C are deemed to have operated by the so-called “de-opener” method, which refers to the act of promptly discountinging the actual sold gold, rather than the “gold-opener” but the act of tending to trade with a credit card without any sale of gold, and thus, it shall be corrected.

In addition, according to the evidence adopted and examined by the court, the defendant and C are recognized to have sold the card tin, etc. other than the card tin. Thus, the defendant and C are recognized to have sold the card tin. Thus, to the extent that the basic facts of the facts charged are within the same scope, and the defendant and C are not likely to substantially disadvantage the exercise of the defendant's right to defense, without the procedure of changing the indictment

Defendant Co-Defendant C (hereinafter “C”) prior to separation from the Defendant, using the fact that around July 2013, he/she was a person who intends to lend a considerable number of funds from among the buyers of the Alley, and opened a shopping mall with the trade name of “G” in D, E, and F, an Internet shopping site. At the same time, he/she sells the Alley, etc., and at the same time engages in retail business of selling the Alley, and he/she has secured customer information to purchase the Alley via the Internet.

arrow