A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a person who actually operates the Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Dispute Resolution D, the Dispute Resolution E, and the Dispute Resolution Fund Co., Ltd.

1. It shall not make false entries in the list of total tax invoices by seller and submit them to the Government without being supplied with any goods or services under the Value-Added Tax Act;

A. On July 25, 2011, the Defendant submitted a false list of total tax invoices by seller as if he/she was supplied with goods or services equivalent to the same amount, even though he/she was not supplied with goods or services in the amount of KRW 80,000,00,000 in the first period of 201 by the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd.

B. Around January 25, 2012, the Defendant submitted a false list of total tax invoices by seller as if he/she was supplied with goods or services equivalent to the same amount, even though he/she did not receive goods or services from the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. from the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., in 2011, the Defendant submitted a false list of total tax invoices by seller as he/she was supplied with goods or services equivalent to the same amount.

C. Around January 25, 2012, the Defendant submitted a false list of total tax invoices by seller as if he/she was supplied with goods or services equivalent to the same amount, even though he/she did not receive goods or services from the KG in 2011, 940,800,000 from the KG.

2. He/she shall not make a false entry of the list of the total tax invoices by customer and submit it to the Government without supplying any goods or services under the Value-Added Tax Act;

A. On July 25, 2011, the Defendant entered a list of total tax invoices by customer, and submitted it to the Gangwon-do office, as if he supplied goods or services equivalent to the same amount, even though he/she did not supply goods or services of KRW 80,000,000 in the first period of the year 201.

B. The Defendant on January 201