logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.08.20 2013고합491
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(조세)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months and by a fine of 2,200,000 won.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[2013Gohap491] From October 15, 2012 to April 30, 2013, the Defendant is a person who operates a respective gas station in the name of “D gas station” in Sejong Special Self-Governing City of Sejong, and from October 15, 2012 to February 28, 2013, with the trade name of “F gas station” in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon, Daejeon, from October 25, 2012 to February 28, 2013.

1. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Delivery, etc. of False Tax Invoice) submitted the list of total tax invoices entered in the list of total tax invoices by entering it in the list of total tax invoices, which is the supply of goods or services equivalent to KRW 2,674,727,273, when filing the return of value-added tax for the second period of January 25, 2013.

However, the fact that the gas station was not supplied with goods or services equivalent to the amount of the gas station from H.

In addition, the Defendant submitted a list of total tax invoices by customer as shown in the list of separate crimes, and submitted to the Government the total value of KRW 13,739,490,90,000, including the supply value of KRW 7,256,258,272,728, and the supply value of KRW 13,739,490,90 on February 2, 2012, as if the Defendant did not receive any goods or services from the customer even though he did not receive any goods or services from the customer.

After all, the Defendant entered the list of total tax invoices by customer in the list of total tax invoices by customer for profit to KRW 13,739,490,909, and submitted it to the government.

2. On January 25, 2013, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (tax) submitted a value-added tax return for the Jeju District Tax Office, which was scheduled to be submitted on February 2012, 2012, the Defendant did not have been supplied with the petroleum products equivalent to KRW 2,674,727,273 from H. In spite of the absence of such fact, the Defendant entered the purchase amount as if he was supplied with the petroleum products equivalent to the above supply value in the value-added tax return and the list of total tax invoices at the D Liquor Tax Office, and submitted it to the said tax office by fraud or other unlawful means.

arrow