logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2015.07.09 2014노740
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(허위세금계산서교부등)등
Text

Defendant

A All appeals against the Defendants by the Prosecutor and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence (the two years of imprisonment and fine of 2.3 billion won, the imprisonment of 10 months, and the suspended execution of two years) sentenced by the court below to the Defendants is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of Defendant A issued a false tax invoice without actually supplying the closed scrap metal or scrap metal, and did not receive a tax invoice in collusion with the purchaser of the scrap metal. Defendant B submitted a list of the total tax invoices by sales office stating false details as if the seller had sold scrap metal to the seller without making the scrap metal transaction.

The Defendants’ crime is committed with such difficulties as to make it difficult for the State to impose and collect taxes, thereby seriously disturbing tax order, and undermining the justice of tax by passing the burden on the general public, and the quality of such crime is not easy.

Furthermore, in this case, the supply value of false tax invoices issued by Defendant A in total is approximately KRW 2.7 billion, and the supply value of the tax invoices issued in collusion is about KRW 630 million in total, and the supply value of the false tax invoices submitted by Defendant B exceeds KRW 2 billion in total.

Defendant

A, on the ground of Defendant B, etc. as the head of the branch office, was actually operating a wide-scale coal company appearing in the instant crime and led to the said crime.

On the other hand, the Defendants were aware of all the instant crimes, and they seriously resisted with the mistake.

Defendants have no record of punishment for the same kind of crime.

It seems that the profits actually acquired by the Defendants from the crime of this case are not significant.

Defendant

B is the president who is under the direction of Defendant A, and the degree of the commission of crime is relatively minor.

The defendants' age, character, character and environment as well as these circumstances.

arrow