All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Criminal facts shall be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). The choice of evidence and probative value of evidence conducted on the premise of fact finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court.

(1) For the reasons indicated in its holding, the court below acknowledged that (1) Defendant A’s act of intentionally omitting sales constitutes “Fraud or other unlawful act” under Article 9(1) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act) and the intent of evasion is recognized, and thus, Defendant A’s act of evading sales constitutes “Fraud or other unlawful act” under Article 9(1) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (Article 3(1) of the same Act; Article 308(3) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (Article 3(1) of the same Act) and actively reveal the intent to evade value-added tax even if there is no act of operating accounting books, etc., and thus, Defendant A did not accept the grounds for appeal as to mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

The part of the ground of appeal disputing the lower court’s fact-finding is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which is the free judgment of the fact-finding court.

In addition, while examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the legal principle at the time of the original judgment and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s judgment is contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, “an act of evading taxes by fraudulent or other unlawful means,” which is the constituent elements of the crime of tax evasion as provided in the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act,