beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
The prosecution against the defendant is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.
2. Ex officio determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the Defendant jointly operated D Co., Ltd. producing A and health auxiliary food. The fact is that the Defendant submitted to the tax office around January 25, 2009 a tax invoice of the total supply amount of KRW 120,300,000, stating the false content that he was issued three copies of the tax invoice equivalent to the total supply amount of KRW 120,300,000, even though he was not supplied with goods or services from A and A&B non-existence, and the Defendant submitted to the tax office around January 25, 2010, a tax invoice of the total supply amount of KRW 57,50,000, stating the false content that he was issued four copies of the tax invoice of the total supply amount of KRW 57,50,000 in the total supply amount of the goods
B. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant, we examine whether the indictment of this case is legitimate ex officio.
(1) The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Article 10(3)3 of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 11210, Jan. 26, 2012; hereinafter the same), and cannot be prosecuted without accusation by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, the director of a regional tax office, or the head of a tax office under Article 21 of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.
(2) According to the records of this case, a written accusation submitted by the head of the Geumcheon District Tax Office to the head of the Geumcheon District Tax Office on November 7, 201 (section 2-2-4 of the Investigation Record) is stated to the effect that “The Defendant Company G, a representative of the Defendant, received the processed tax invoices of KRW 120,300,000 without any real transaction during the taxable period of February 2, 2009, and committed an offense in violation of Article 10(3)1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act by issuing the processed tax invoices of KRW 57,50,000 in four copies during the taxable period of February 2, 2009.” The facts charged of this case and the former Tax Law.