logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 홍성지원 2018.11.08 2018고합21
조세범처벌법위반등
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment of two years and six months and fine of 1,224,00,000 won, Defendant B of two years and fine of 900,000,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant A (before the opening of 2018 name: E and F) is the representative of the “H” located in Chungcheongnam-gun G, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and a person mediating issuance of false invoices for the transaction of non-data fishery products by fishery products distributors.

Defendant

B It is a person delegated with authority, such as the interest of the representative of the Do retail company of fishery products in Chungcheongnam-gun I market J, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and the management of the purchase place of "M" operated by his wife L in the same building, issuance of invoices, and tax reports.

Defendant

C is the representative of the “N” as the wholesale and retail chain of fishery products in the above J.

No person shall issue, without supplying goods or services for profit, an invoice under tax-related Acts and tax-related Acts of corporations, or make a false entry of a list of invoices by customer and submit it to the Government.

Nevertheless, Defendant A and B, who did not supply this goods or services, issued a false invoice in the name of “K” or “M” under the name of a business entity exempt from value-added tax, which is a local restaurant in Seoul, Gyeonggi, and other metropolitan areas, or a business entity exempt from value-added tax, and conspired to have the fees received in return for the issuance. Defendant A and C conspired to issue a false invoice in the name of “N”, which is a value-free business entity, at a local restaurant in the Seoul metropolitan area, including Seoul and Gyeonggi, in which they did not supply the goods or services. Defendant A and C conspired to have the fees received in return for the issuance.

1. According to the joint crimes committed by Defendant A and Defendant B as above, Defendant A delegated the authority to issue invoices in the name of “M” and “K” and the authority to substitute a final purchase report, with respect to the issuance of invoices in the name of “M” and “K”;

A. Notwithstanding the absence of the fact that fishery products were supplied to “M” under this “M,” a statement of accounts in the name of “M” as if the fishery products worth KRW 42,00,000 were supplied to “M” in this context.

arrow