The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and by a fine of twenty million won.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the lower court’s punishment (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and fine of twenty million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. We examine the judgment of the court below as to the number of crimes ex officio.

The crime of Articles 3 and 4 at the time of the judgment of the court below is established since the defendant submits a false list of total tax invoices by customer and by seller when filing the return of value-added tax for the first time in January 2012, and in principle, the list of total tax invoices by customer and by seller is established by each act of submitting the list of total tax invoices by customer. However, on July 25, 2012, the defendant submitted the list of total tax invoices by customer to the head of Seoul Tax Office on the return of value-added tax to the head of Seoul Tax Office on July 25, 2012.

Nevertheless, the court below held that each of the above crimes is in a substantive concurrent relationship and held concurrent crimes. In so doing, the court below erred in the judgment of the number of crimes and affected the judgment.

B. Furthermore, we examine the lower court’s aggravation of concurrent crimes.

After the lower court imposed both punishment and fines pursuant to Article 10(5) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (hereinafter “the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act”) on the violation of Article 10(3) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (hereinafter “the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act”), the lower court applied Article 38(1)2 of the Criminal Act to each fine on the ground that each of the above crimes is concurrent crimes.

However, Article 20 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act provides that Article 38 (1) 2 of the Criminal Code does not apply to a person who commits an offense in violation of Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.

The Supreme Court wholly amended by Act No. 9919 on January 1, 2010

Article 4 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act applies to a person who commits an offense under Article 11-2 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act. Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act applies to a person in relation to the aggravation of concurrent offenses.