Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: The defendant asserts that, with respect to the punishment of unfair sentencing (a imprisonment of one year and six months, a fine of 20.8 billion won per day, and a fine of 20.8 billion won per day) by the court below, the defendant is too unreasonable and unfair, and the prosecutor asserts that it is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. The lower court rendered a sentence of one year and six months and a fine of 20.8 billion won, comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) the Defendant’s unfavorable circumstances; (b) the instant crime disturbs the national tax order and seriously damages the tax justice; (c) the nature of the crime is extremely poor; (d) the sum of the supply values on the sales and purchase tax invoices issued or received by the Defendant falsely exceeds KRW 200 billion; (b) the profits acquired by the Defendant as a result of the instant crime appears to be less than the amount of the false tax invoices received by the Defendant or the profits acquired by other accomplices; and (d) the Defendant’s participation in and against the instant crime.

Although it was true that the defendant's use of the credit rating company for the distribution of non-data and operated for a certain amount of consideration for causing serious trouble in the appropriate operation of tax administration, the defendant's punishment against the defendant is concurrently imposed more fines exceeding the amount of profit actually earned by the crime of this case and the defendant seems to be confined in the labor union for a considerable period in light of the defendant's financial ability; the sentence and the period of detention for accomplices and related persons; the defendant's family members and employees in the same industry as the defendant's family members want to be placed in the labor union for a considerable period; the sentencing of the court below is determined within the recommendation range set by the Supreme Court's Sentencing Committee and there is no special change in circumstances that can be assessed differently from the sentencing conditions set forth in Article 51 of the Criminal Act until the trial is held.