The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, as the head of the laboratory affiliated with the OM Technical Research Institute, was dispatched to B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”), and was engaged in research and development business, and did not have worked as a management director. Therefore, the Defendant did not have been involved in the receipt of the tax invoice of the instant company.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the various sentencing conditions of this case where sentencing is unfair, the sentence of a fine of KRW 5 million imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant asserted the same purport in the lower court, and based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court determined that, in full view of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant issued a false tax invoice or received a false tax invoice, directly or with the person in charge as

The decision was determined.

In light of the above evidence, a thorough examination of the circumstances presented by the court below in light of the above evidence, the court below's rejection of the defendant's assertion based on such circumstances and finding the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is just, and the evidence presented by the witness I and F and the defendant in the trial alone alone does not interfere with the recognition of the facts charged in this case, and there is no other evidence to reverse this, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. In full view of the grounds for sentencing indicated in the instant arguments and records, the lower court’s sentencing on the Defendant appears to have been appropriately determined by fully taking account of all the circumstances, including the various grounds for sentencing alleged by the Defendant, and the extent of changing the said sentence.