The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two years and by a fine not exceeding two billion won.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress of the instant case’s records.

A. On March 26, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for two years, suspension of execution for three years, and fine for 2.4 billion won.

Criminal facts found guilty in the above judgment are related to the issuance and receipt of 116 copies of false tax invoices equivalent to 20,640,972,500 won, and the facts charged that were found not guilty of the reasons are related to the receipt of 45 copies of false tax invoices equivalent to the total amount of 9,814,486,872 won.

B. On September 24, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for two years, three years of suspension of execution, and fine for 2.1 billion won in the appellate court prior to the commencement of a new trial on September 24, 2015. However, if the Defendant did not pay the said fine, he/she was sentenced to a judgment to attract three million won in the workhouse in accordance with Articles 70(1), 70(2), and 69(2) of the Criminal Act by converting the said fine into one day (hereinafter “determination subject to a new trial”).

Criminal facts which were found guilty in the judgment subject to a retrial are related to the issuance and reception of 104 copies of false tax invoices equivalent to 18,601,594,000 won in total, and the facts charged that were found not guilty of the reasons are related to the receipt of 58 copies of false tax invoices equivalent to 11,853,865,372 won in total.

(c)

Although the Defendant appealed against the judgment subject to a retrial, on January 15, 2016, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.

Accordingly, the judgment subject to a review became final and conclusive on January 15, 2016.

(d)

In this regard, the Constitutional Court in the case of 2015Hun-Ba239, 2016Hun-Ba 177 (Joint) on October 26, 2017, "The amended provisions of Article 70 (2) of the Criminal Act shall apply from the case where the first prosecution is instituted after this Act enters into force.

“The provisions of Article 2(1) of the Addenda to the above Criminal Act determined that Article 2(1) is unconstitutional.

Accordingly, Article 2 (1) of the Addenda to the above Criminal Code was retroactively invalidated in accordance with Article 75 (6) and Article 47 (3) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Accordingly, the amended provisions of Article 70 (2) of the Criminal Code are limited to acts after May 14, 2014, the enforcement date of the amended law.