Whether the non-declaration or under-declaration of the tax base constitutes “the act of fraud or other unlawful act” as stipulated in Article 9 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (negative)

"Fraud and other unlawful acts" referred to in Article 9 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act mean the deception and other active acts that make it impossible or considerably difficult to impose and collect taxes as a means of tax evasion, with the intent of tax evasion, and without accompanying such acts, the facts that the person did not simply file a tax return under the tax law or by underreporting the tax base and does not constitute unlawful acts.

Article 9 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act

Supreme Court Decision 76Do4078 Delivered on May 10, 1977

Defendant 1 and three others

Defendants (Defendant 2, 3) and Prosecutor (Defendant 1, 2, and 4)

Attorney Sick-si, finite, and stimule-type

Seoul High Court Decision 82No789, 82No1517 Decided January 20, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

1. The prosecutor's grounds of appeal as to Defendant 1, 2, and 4 are examined.

Article 9 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act refers to a deceptive scheme or other active act that makes it impossible or considerably difficult to impose and collect taxes as a means of tax evasion with the intent of tax evasion, and it is reasonable to interpret that such act does not include the fact that a tax return under the tax law is not filed without accompanying the act, or a tax is not paid by underreporting the tax base (see Supreme Court Decision 76Do4078, May 10, 197).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below is just in holding that the above Defendants were acquitted on the grounds that the tax evasion was due to the Defendants’ active misconduct, although the tax evasion was not caused by the Defendants’ active misconduct, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act. We cannot accept the argument.

2. The grounds of appeal by the defense counsel of the defendant 2 and the defendant 3 are examined together.

Examining the evidence cited by the court below by comparing the records, the court below's decision that found the Defendants guilty of the facts constituting the crime as stated in the judgment is justified, and it cannot be said that there was an error of law by misunderstanding the facts in violation of the rules of evidence, and the defendant 3's assertion of unfair sentencing is not a legitimate ground for appeal under the Criminal Procedure Act in this case where the court below sentenced a fine

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Jung-soo (Presiding Justice) and Lee Jong-young's Lee Jong-young