The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 피고인 ⑴ 사실오인 및 법리오해 ㈎ 주식회사 J의 실제 운영자는 피고인이 아니라 K이다.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by recognizing the Defendant as the operator of JJ on the sole basis of the statement of K without credibility.

㈏ 피고인은 ① 매출처인 L에 실제로 비철금속 등을 납품하고 정상적인 세금계산서를 발행하였으며, ② 별지 범죄일람표 (2)의 ‘발행업체’란의 각 업체들(이하 ‘발행업체들’이라 한다)과 실제 고철거래를 하고 그에 따른 세금계산서를 발급받은 것이다.

Dob. The sentencing of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment and fine of three billion won) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too unjustifiable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor applied for amendments to the indictment with the content that the prosecutor added each of the charges listed in [Attachment 29-36] Nos. 29-36 and [Attachment 136-2] Nos. 136-138 in the case of a party, and the court permitted this.

As such, the subject of the judgment of the court below was changed in the trial, and the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

Although there is a ground for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Judgment on the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by the defendant

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged based on the evidence presented in its judgment.

⑴ J의 실제 운영자 ㈎ 피고인은 H의 실제 운영자로서 주식회사 AA 당진영업소, 주식회사 AA, 주식회사 AB, 주식회사 CJ(이하 ‘주식회사’ 명칭을 생략한다) 등 제련업체와 고철을 공급하는 거래를 하고 있었는데, H이 2010년도분...