A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who was engaged in manufacturing and selling new products with a trade name called “D” in Speaker-si C.

1. On July 25, 2011, the Defendant for the final return on the first half of 2011 filed a final return on the value-added tax for the first half of the year 201 with respect to D in the House of Government Tax Affairs located in the House of Government-si 77 (Council-dong), and the fact was that D was supplied with goods, such as new outbreak equivalent to KRW 72,727,00,000, from E, even though D was supplied with goods from E, it submitted to the said tax office a list of total tax invoices written in false statement as D was supplied with the goods, such as new outbreak amounting to KRW 187,183,00,000, from E.

2. On January 27, 2012, the Defendant for the final return on February 2011 filed a final return on the value-added tax for the second period of 201 with respect to D in the above Government Tax Office, and submitted the final return on the value-added tax for the second period of 201 from D (State)F to the said tax office by entering the supply price of KRW 792,90,000 from D (State)F, the supply price of KRW 57,80,000 from G, and the supply price of KRW 20,24,000 from H, and the supply price of KRW 152,80,000 from J, and the supply price of KRW 10,198,00 from J, and supply price of KRW 1,034,02,00,000 from the said tax office with false entry as if D received new goods, such as new goods from the said company.

3. On July 25, 2012, the Defendant for the final return of the first half of the year 2012 filed a final return on the value-added tax for the first half of the year 2012 with D from the above Government Tax Office, and the fact was that D had not received goods, such as new launch, equivalent to the value of supply from K from K, notwithstanding the fact that D had not received goods equivalent to KRW 745,80,00,000, the list of total tax invoices was falsely entered as if D had received goods, such as new launch, equivalent to the same amount, from K, and submitted to the said tax office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the defendant against the defendant;

1. Part of the police interrogation protocol against the defendant.