logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.10.06 2016고단2906
조세범처벌법위반
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months, by a fine of 4,00,000 won for Defendant B.

However, the defendant A.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the representative director of the defendant B who conducts the business of manufacturing electronic equipment in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Building 507 Dong 213.

1. Defendant A

A. On November 28, 2014, the Defendant received a false tax invoice, stating the supply value as if the supply was provided with services equivalent to KRW 250 million, even though there was no fact that he/she received services for the construction of high-capacity real-time pumps from the MTB office, in the said office, the Defendant received a false purchase tax invoice, stating the supply value as if he/she received services equivalent to KRW 250 million.

In addition, until November 30, 2015, the Defendant was issued a purchase tax invoice equivalent to KRW 728,181,819, in total supply value of 4 times from M&A, as shown in attached Table 1.

B. On November 30, 2014, the Defendant issued a false sales tax invoice as if the supply had provided services equivalent to KRW 250,000,000, inasmuch as there was no fact that he/she provided a “large-scale real-time net-time-time-time-form-form-form-form-form-form-form-form-form-form-building company B office in the above dispute settlement bank.”

In addition, by November 30, 2015, the Defendant issued sales tax invoices equivalent to KRW 728,181,819 in total of supply value to MTT, four times as shown in attached Table 2 of the crime committed.

2. The Defendant, a representative of the Defendant, did not receive goods or services as set forth in paragraph (1) in connection with the Defendant’s business, issued six false purchase tax invoices equivalent to KRW 728,181,819 in total of the supply value from the M&T, and issued six false sale tax invoices equivalent to KRW 728,181,819 in total to M&T, without supplying goods or services, but neglected to exercise due care and supervision over the pertinent business in order to prevent such violation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Electronic tax invoices and.

arrow