Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment for fraud at the Incheon District Court on April 25, 2012, and the execution of the above sentence was terminated at the Net Prison on May 3, 2013, and from February 7, 2014 to January 2015, A is a person who operated a mutual clothes manufacturing company of “D” in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Dongdaemun-gu manufacturing company under the name of E.

Around July 25, 2014, the Defendant filed a final return on the value-added tax for the period of 1, 2014 with the foregoing company, and submitted to the said tax office a false statement on the list of accounts for each place of sale, as the Defendant supplied goods equivalent to KRW 150,000,000, even though the said company did not have supplied F with goods equivalent to the said amount of the said amount, and submitted the said tax office with a false statement on the list of accounts for each place of sale, irrespective of the fact that the said company received goods equivalent to KRW 138,00,000 from G, and the H agricultural partnership did not have received goods equivalent to KRW 138,00,000 from G, even though there was no fact that the said company received goods equivalent to the said amount of the said amount of money.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A written accusation;

1. A list of invoices of separate taxation by customer, and a list of invoices of purchase punishment tax;

1. Report on investigation (Supplement of the written accusation);

1. Previous convictions: Application of inquiries, such as criminal history, replys to inquiries and the current expropriation status of individuals;

1. Article 10 (3) 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act concerning the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. The proviso to Article 35 and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is against the Defendant’s starting committing the instant crime.

Defendant has no record of punishment for the same kind of crime.

The number of the crimes of this case is only one time, and the sentence of the defendant on the ground that the defendant is a repeated offender is extremely harsh.

These circumstances and the defendant's seal.