logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2013.05.08 2013고단566
조세범처벌법위반
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Attachment] On February 6, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution for violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act at the Seoul Eastern District Court on February 6, 2013, and the judgment became final and conclusive on the 14th

【Criminal Facts】

A list of total tax invoices by seller and seller shall not be submitted to the Government without being supplied with or being supplied with goods or services by false entry.

On July 25, 2010, the Defendant filed the final return of value-added tax on (BEM) 486 EM households’ 2010.1. from Echeon-dong 486 E.S., the Defendant stated that he was supplied with goods or services equivalent to KRW 239,090,908, although he did not have received any goods or services from the (BE) E.S. General, and submitted to an employee whose name is not known, even though he was supplied with goods or services equivalent to KRW 113,472,727, as he was supplied with goods or services from the (BE) E.S. shock.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written accusation, a tax offense guard, a written opinion, and a report on the closure of trade order;

1. Details of M household account transactions; and

1. Previous records: Criminal records, previous records and results of confirmation of dispositions, and application of statutes governing the judgment;

1. Article 10 (3) 3 of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (Amended by Act No. 11210, Jan. 26, 2012);

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., that the defendant reflects his mistake and that it would have been sentenced to suspended execution if it is judged as the same as the final and conclusive judgment in the judgment);

arrow