The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 40,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of the legal principles 1) The Defendant, while operating a dispatched company that directly trades with the employer, received a proposal from F and E to subcontract a part of the transactions that the Defendant company received from F and E, and accepted to pay 25% of its value by evading value added taxes.

2) It is an example of crime failure to ensure a dispatched company that directly trades with an employer in the context of tax evasion of the employee dispatch business.

The Defendant was well aware of the aforementioned crime structure in the industry while running the temporary agency business for a long time.

When considering the structure of the crime of this case, the role, status, and scale of gains acquired, the defendant's act constitutes a joint principal offender.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (amounting to KRW 40 million) is too uneasy and unfair.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the ex officio judgment.

A. According to the provisions of Article 20 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, when a person who commits an offense under Article 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act is excluded from the application of the provision on aggravation of restriction on concurrent crimes under Article 38(1)2 of the Criminal Act, where a fine is imposed against several concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a fine shall be imposed separately for each of the concurrent crimes and the amount of fine shall be imposed (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do3131, Jul. 23, 2009). The lower court imposed a fine on the Defendant by applying Article 3(1)1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, Article 32(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 20 of the Criminal Act, while imposing a fine separately for each crime under Article 38(1)20 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, and imposed a fine of KRW 4 million for all the concurrent crimes subject to aggravated punishment.

In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine under Article 20 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.