beta
Text
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and imprisonment with prison labor for six months.
However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The facts charged appear to have used the expression "aggravated divorce" in the sense that the Defendants primarily divorced for the purpose of evading disposition on default. However, in light of the attitude of judicial precedents on the requirements for the most null and void divorce under private law (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 93Meu171, Jun. 11, 1993), it appears that the divorce of the Defendants may not be deemed null and void under private law. Thus, such expression is not used.
In addition, considering the Defendants’ attitude toward the facts charged, even if not using the expression “a false divorce,” it seems that there is no risk of causing substantial disadvantages to the Defendants’ exercise of their right to defense.
Defendant
A From April 1, 2009 to September 30, 2012, A is a person who operates a “D” for used parts of a motor vehicle wholesale and retail business in the wife population C, and Defendant B operated the said D from October 1, 2012 to December 1, 2016, and was the legal couple from May 29, 201 to May 21, 201, and was divorced on January 21, 2016.
In the course of the tax investigation with respect to Defendant B from November 25, 2015 to January 15, 2016, Defendant A discovered the omission of cash income by using the borrowed name account of Defendant B at the time of operating the said D in 2011 and 2012, and conducted a tax investigation with respect to Defendant A from February 15, 2016 to March 5, 2016. Accordingly, Defendant A did not pay KRW 421,257,650 of global income tax from the head of Andong Tax Office by May 31, 2016.
No taxpayer shall conceal or omit property, or make a false contract on such property for the purpose of evading or evading the disposition on default.
1. Defendant A received prior notice of a tax investigation conducted on November 10, 2015 on the grounds that the revenue amount was omitted from the GUT on November 10, 2015, and the tax investigation commenced on November 25, 2015.