Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 2,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The Defendants respectively.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants appeared as witnesses of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Issuance of False Tax Invoice) against E of Busan District Court 201No. 210, and tried to testify.

The facts charged in the above case are as follows: E is a stock company F (hereinafter “F”).

) As the representative director of the F, a false tax invoice issued an amount equivalent to KRW 95,781,818, which entered as if the F were supplied via the F without having actually supplied the goods or services, and received the total value of KRW 15,157,789,852 in total of the supply value of the false tax invoice 51 without being supplied with the goods or services.

1. On April 13, 2012, Defendant A appeared as a witness of the instant case in Busan District Court Branch 101, Busan District Court Branch 101 located in Busan District Court, Busan District Court Branch 101, and the Defendant was prepared to the effect that “F was directly established by the president and was the actual operator involved in the overall operation including purchase and sale,” and testified on the process of preparing the confirmation document of August 26, 201, which was submitted to the relevant police station.

The Defendant testified to the effect that the Defendant prepared the aforementioned confirmation document by discussing the testimony “B was prepared by the witness at the house of B” with “B,” and then, the Defendant testified to the effect that “B prepared the confirmation document at the house of B, i.e., “B, as the content of the confirmation document is written.” or “W, upon discussion by the witness and B, made the confirmation document.” At the time, B testified to the effect that B prepared the confirmation document by discussing the testimony at the house of B, “B did not have any participation.”

However, the facts are not prepared by the defendant at B's office, but at L on August 25, 201, the defendant was requested by the investigating police officer to prepare and submit a confirmation document, such as L, which was being investigated at L, and at H on August 26, 201.