beta
Text
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. The court below found that the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act by the false number of tax invoices, which are the primary facts charged, was acquitted (not guilty in the part related to D), and found the guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act by the failure to receive the tax invoices, which are the primary facts charged, and found the guilty of the portion related to D and the remainder thereof not guilty.
On the other hand, the defendant filed an appeal only for the guilty portion of the judgment below, and the prosecutor filed an appeal only for the ancillary charge portion.
Therefore, the part of the acquittal of the main facts charged was excluded from the appeal of both parties, and the part of the acquittal of the reasons was determined separately from the appeal of both parties. However, the part of the acquittal of the reasons was judged in the trial together with the guilty part according to the principle of no appeal, and is in fact separated from the object of the trial. Thus, the conclusion of the judgment of the court below is followed and the decision
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant (legal scenario) asserted that “H cannot issue a tax invoice because it is not registered as a business operator under the Value-Added Tax Act, and it does not constitute a person obligated to prepare and issue a tax invoice under Article 10(1) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 16108, Dec. 31, 2018); thus, Defendant did not receive a tax invoice from H, and thus, Defendant cannot engage in a rate of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act on the ground that he did not receive a tax invoice after being supplied with the goods from H, but withdrawn the aforementioned misapprehension of legal principles as to the subject of issuance of the tax invoice on May 12, 202.
The Defendant did not have conspired with H in relation to the receipt of tax invoices.
B. (1) The prosecutor (1) misjudgmentation of facts (A) related assertion B (Article 1 of the Preliminary Facts) actually supplies the Defendant with goods.