beta
Text
The judgment below
Of those, the part concerning Defendant B is reversed.
Defendant
Punishment of Company B shall be imposed on Company B.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., in a case where the defendant A is a defendant: imprisonment with prison labor for six months; suspended sentence; fine for five million won; and suspended sentence) of the judgment of the court below is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.
2. The crime of this case was committed on the part of Defendant A, the representative director of Defendant B, who was supplied the automobile parts from the supplier, but did not receive the purchase tax invoice. The crime was committed that distorted the materials, which form the basis for the calculation of value-added tax, and caused serious harm to the national tax administration intending to secure proper and smooth finances, and the nature of the crime is not less than that of the crime. The supply price of the purchase tax invoice, which was not received by the Defendants, amounts to more than 1.75 billion won, and the period and collection of which are significant, are disadvantageous to the Defendants.
On the other hand, Defendant A is divided into and contradictory to his criminal act; Defendant A appears to have caused the criminal act of this case by failing to refuse to comply with the request from a customer who had long-term relationship with Defendant A; Defendant appears to have no economic benefits from the failure to receive the purchase tax invoice of this case; Defendants did not receive the input tax deduction of value-added tax; Defendants paid taxes in good faith; Defendants A paid taxes; Defendant A was a primary offender with no criminal history; Defendant A’s operation status of Defendant B is difficult.
In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances that led to the instant crime, including the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., the lower court’s sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable, and thus, the Prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing is not acceptable.
3. Ex officio determination: Dominant, Defendant .