beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant, as indicated in No. 1 of the List of Crimes No. 1 as indicated in the judgment of the court below, shall be the “E” (hereinafter “E”) in December 16, 2013.
A) The tax invoice of KRW 80 million issued with respect to Company E shall not be deemed to have issued a false tax invoice by cancelling the revised tax invoice after issuing the revised tax invoice. In addition, the Defendant’s receipt of advance payment KRW 300 million from E and commencement of the design, while requesting the BankF to produce a list, the portion of KRW 300 million out of the above tax invoice shall not be deemed to have been actually supplied goods or services. Therefore, since the total amount of the sales tax invoice issued or received by the Defendant is less than KRW 5 billion, the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Special Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act”).
2) Article 8-2(1)1 of the Act provides that “The Defendant shall be provided with goods or services according to the contract” and Article 8-2(1)2 of the Act provides that “The Defendant shall be provided with goods or services under the contract” and “the Defendant shall be provided with goods or services under the contract.”
B. The sentence of the lower court on the Defendant’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspension of execution and fine of 520,000 won in June of one year and six months) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court comprehensively construed Article 10(3)1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and Article 8-2(1) of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act, the crime of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Delivery of False Tax Invoice) due to the issuance and receipt of false tax invoices, shall be deemed to have reached the number of years immediately after the issuance or issuance of tax invoices without actually supplying or being supplied with goods or services. Thus, the Defendant No. 1 of the attached Table