Defendant

A A Fine of 35,00,000 won, Defendant B of the case shall be punished by a fine of 5,000,000 won, and Defendant C of the case.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A establishes and operates a stock company B around March 27, 2003. A practically operated a stock company from April 2, 2010 to May 22, 2013.

Defendant

B is a corporation established with the business purpose of waste oil refining business, etc., and the defendant C was a corporation that used to reprocessing business of petroleum oil products.

1. Defendant A

A. Violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the failure to receive a tax invoice and the receipt of a false tax invoice 1) No person who is obligated to receive a tax invoice pursuant to the Value-Added Tax Act shall be issued a tax invoice in collusion with each other. A) While operating the corporation C, the Defendant related to C did not receive a tax invoice in collusion with the above in-house name, while being provided with with a sea waste oil that cannot be identified on or around January 4, 201, but did not receive a tax invoice in collusion with the above in-house name beneficiary. From around that time to November 24, 2011, the Defendant did not issue a tax invoice in collusion with the non-indicted in the name of 574 persons who were provided with the marine waste oil over a total of 574 times from the non-indicted in the name, as shown in the attached Table 1.

B) The Defendant related to B, while operating the Co., Ltd. B, supplied marine waste oil from Dr or tank lock articles whose name is unknown on July 30, 2012, but did not receive a tax invoice in collusion with the above-mentioned persons. From around that time to December 6, 2012, the Defendant did not receive a tax invoice in collusion with the above-mentioned persons, as shown in attached Table 1-1, even though he/she was provided with marine waste oil on 22 occasions from his/her nameless persons, as shown in attached Table 1-1, but did not receive a tax invoice in collusion with the above-mentioned persons. (2) The receipt of a false tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act was not possible.

The defendant.