2016No2203 Violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act

1. A;

2. B

Defendant A and Prosecutor

Freeboard (Lawsuits) Now Doz. (Public Trial)

C (for Defendant A)

Attorney in charge D

Ulsan District Court Decision 2016Ma2529 Decided December 15, 2016

May 19, 2017

All appeals by Defendant A and prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A

The sentence of the lower court against Defendant A (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

(b) A prosecutor;

The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants (Defendant B: fine of KRW 50 million) is too unhued and unreasonable. 2.

The arguments of the defendant A and the prosecutor are also examined.

On the other hand, each of the crimes of this case constitutes a serious obstacle to the legitimate exercise of the State’s right to tax collection against the entire relevant business operators, and the liability for such crime is not less weak. The scope of issuance of the non-issued tax invoice and the false or false tax invoice is small, and it is a repeated crime over a long period of time that is unfavorable to the Defendants.

On the other hand, the defendants reflects the wrongness while committing the crime in depth, the economic benefits directly acquired by the crime of this case are relatively less, and the defendants paid the delinquent tax late, and the defendant A was the first offender in favor of the defendant.

Considering the aforementioned unfavorable circumstances and the motive and background of the crime, the means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, the character and conduct of the Defendant A, the environment, and occupation, etc., the punishment of the lower court does not seem to be too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the above argument by the defendant A and the prosecutor is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal by Defendant A and the appeal by the prosecutor against the Defendants is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Dong-sik

Judges Kim Jong-soo

Judges Whitek