The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (legal scenarios) is that the Defendant’s act of allowing another person to use his/her business registration as described in the facts charged constitutes “act of allowing another person to use his/her name and make business registration in the name of another person” under Article 11(2) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 13627, Dec. 29, 2015; hereinafter “former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act”). However, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The principle of no punishment without law requires that crimes and penalties be determined by law in order to protect individual freedom and rights from arbitrary exercise of the state penal authority.

In light of such purport, the interpretation of the penal law must be strict, and it is not permitted to expand or analogically interpret the meaning of the explicit penal law in the direction unfavorable to the defendant as it is against the principle of no punishment without law.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do4230, Nov. 28, 2013). (B)

In full view of the circumstances in the court below's reasoning, it is justified that the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground that there was no penal provision for such act at the time of the defendant's act as stated in the facts charged for the reasons stated in its reasoning, and there is no error of law as argued by the

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.