A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant served as a tax official from around August 1982 to around August 1989. Around 1990, the Defendant acquired the qualification as a tax accountant and served as a tax accountant at the tax accounting corporation E located in Busan Jin-gu from around that time to June 2013.

On the other hand, on April 30, 2002, F sold to I 2.5 billion won a motherel located in He, which was under the her husband’s name, in Busan Northern-gu, Busan, which was under the her husband’s name, but the purchase price was KRW 2.1 billion, and F reported it to the North Northern-do Tax Office.

However, on April 22, 2011, when I purchased the above telecom, sold the above telecom to J on April 22, 201, and made a preliminary return of capital gains tax on the Northbuban Tax Office on June 29, 2011, it stated the acquisition value of the above telecom as KRW 2.55 billion.

Before June 28, 2012, the North Busan District Tax Office decided that the purchase price of KRW 2.1 billion reported in the name of G was false, and notified that the amount of value-added tax of KRW 89,659,405 was imposed in the name of G, and that the amount of KRW 130,000,000 should be imposed in addition to the global income tax in the name of G.

1. On July 18, 2012, the Defendant in violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act received the notice of the value-added tax in advance at the above tax accounting corporation E office and received counseling about the solution thereof, “I would be able to reduce the tax amount to KRW 30 million in cash. If you pass through the fraternity in charge of the North Korean tax office, we will not be able to know all the things.” The Defendant was issued KRW 30 million in cash from F and KRW 20 million in cash and KRW 10 million in cashier’s checks, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant received money and valuables under the pretext of soliciting cases or affairs handled by public officials.

2. Around August 8, 2012, the Defendant’s occupational embezzlement intends to be exempt from value-added tax and general income tax to be imposed in the E-office of the said tax accounting corporation and then file a revised return of the franchise purchase price at KRW 2.1 billion with the approval of the tax office, and if so, I will obtain the approval of the tax office.