logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2020.01.14 2019고단974
조세범처벌법위반
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment for one year, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 30 million won, respectively.

However, the defendant A.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A is the representative director of Company B, which is located in Jeonju-gun C. A.

Despite the fact that a person liable to prepare and issue a tax invoice under the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the non-issuance of a tax invoice fails to issue a tax invoice, the Defendant supplied D with goods equivalent to KRW 2,727,273 at the above office of the corporation B on June 30, 2014, and did not issue a tax invoice from June 29, 2018, from that time, until June 29, 2018, by supplying goods equivalent to KRW 2,651,131,041 in total, as shown in the separate list of crimes (1).

B. Notwithstanding that a person liable to prepare and issue a tax invoice pursuant to the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the issuance of a false entry in the tax invoice may not issue the tax invoice by entering it in a false manner, the Defendant issued a false tax invoice at around December 31, 2015, even though he/she supplied bathing goods, etc. in an amount equivalent to KRW 2,454,545 to E at the office of the said stock company B, the Defendant issued a false tax invoice at KRW 30,000, as stated in the tax invoice, from June 30, 2014 to June 27, 2018, including the issuance of the tax invoice at KRW 337,698,272 in total, including the supply price of goods equivalent to KRW 1,968,583,00,00 in total, even though he/she supplied goods equivalent to KRW 1,68,584,720,00 in total, issued the tax invoice at KRW 109.

C. Even if the Defendant did not issue a tax invoice and issue or issue a tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act without supplying or being supplied with goods or services in violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act by issuing a tax invoice despite the absence of the supply of goods or services, the Defendant actually supplied the F, Inc.’s office around June 30, 2014.

arrow