The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The sentence (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and two years of fine (2.1 billion won) imposed by the court below) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Ex officio determination

(a) The erroneous Constitutional Court of Justice on October 26, 2017, regarding the application of the statute on the confinement of a workhouse, applies to the amendment of Article 70(2) of the Criminal Act when a first public prosecution is instituted after this Act enters into force.

Article 2(1) of the Addenda to the Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014; hereinafter “amended Criminal Act”) decided that a crime would be in violation of the Constitution against the principle of influence of punishment (the Constitutional Court Order 2015HunBa239, 2016HunBa177 (Consolidation) dated October 26, 2017). This decision was made before the enforcement of the amended Criminal Act, but if a fine exceeding KRW 100 million was imposed on a criminal act prosecuted after the enforcement of the amended Criminal Act, Article 70(2) of the amended Criminal Act, which amended the lower limit of the period of detention in the workhouse, was retroactively invalidated in accordance with Articles 75(6) and 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Ultimately, Article 70(2) of the amended Criminal Code applies only to a criminal act conducted after May 14, 2014, the enforcement date of which is May 14, 2014, and Article 70 of the former Criminal Code (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014; hereinafter the same) applies to a criminal act conducted before that.

In this regard, the court below recognized each crime that was committed before the enforcement of the amended Criminal Code, and suspended the sentence of a fine of KRW 2.1 billion, and applied Article 70 of the former Criminal Code when determining the period of detention in the workhouse, although Article 70 of the former Criminal Code was applied.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the detention of the workhouse.

B. On the other hand, the Prosecutor’s amendment of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Article 8-2(1)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes), Article 10(3)1 and 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, Article 37 of the Criminal Act.