The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who actually operates F in Busan Shipping Daegu E in the name of the defendant's wife D.

No tax invoice shall be issued or received without supplying or receiving goods or services.

Nevertheless, around October 31, 2016, the Defendant issued a tax invoice on the Defendant’s residence located in Busan metropolitan Daegu G G G G 101 Dong 2606, and the fact that F did not supply goods or services to H Co., Ltd., a trading partner, with the supply price of KRW 1,040,000,000 (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”).

2. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts constituting an offense prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true enough to have no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). If there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's conviction, it is inevitable to determine the defendant's interest as the defendant's interest (Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9890 Decided February 12, 2009). Meanwhile, "a person who issues or receives a tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act without supplying goods or services" under Article 10(3)1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act means a person who issues a processed tax invoice without real transactions (the so-called "data person who issues or receives a tax invoice without being supplied with goods or services", and even if actual transactions, such as concluding a contract to supply goods or services, etc., by having the service provider deliver the tax invoice or tax invoice without any relevant provisions, such as value-added tax law.