beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles regarding the crime of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act as stated in paragraph (1) of the crime in the judgment of the court below was led by the co-defendant B, and the defendant was only passively involved in the crime of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act. However, the court below concluded that the defendant led the crime of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act. The court below erred by misunderstanding
B) In the case of the crime of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act relating to the N's "N" as stated in Paragraph (2) of the crime of the court below, although the defendant started to engage in the scrap metal sales business with the co-defendant B, D, and the residents' opposition at the time, the court below concluded that the defendant committed the crime of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act in collusion with the co-defendant B, D, andO at the court below, and that the defendant committed the crime of violating the above Punishment of Tax Evaders Act. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence of imprisonment [6 months (No. 1, No. 21, No. 21, No. 21, and No. 22, and No. 35 of the crime No. 2 of the crime at the time of the court below] and imprisonment of six months (no. 2,000 won among the crimes at the time of the court below's decision.
B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendant is too unfortunate and unfair.
2. Determination
A. 1) With respect to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court as to the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the lower court is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant committed the crime of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, such as the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the lower court, under the joint Defendant B, C, and D’s conspiracy and role sharing as indicated in paragraph (1) of the same Article, and such violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.