All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) In light of the statement made by the party related to the other party company to the transaction as to the process of issuing the false tax invoice by Defendant A, Defendant A issued a false tax invoice for the purpose of providing convenience to the existing transaction company and of increasing sales through the continuation of transaction relationship or the expansion of transaction partners. As such, the “for profit” under Article 8-2(1)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is recognized.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (one year of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment), Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”), and Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is too uneased and unreasonable.

Defendants: The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

1) As to the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake as to the grounds for appeal, the summary of the instant facts charged against Defendant A is as follows: (a) Defendant A operated the Defendant Company, a household retail company, and provided goods or services for profit-making purposes from January 6, 201 to December 31, 2015; (b) provided goods or services on 233 occasions in total, as shown in [Attachment List 1] and 2] of the lower judgment, as if the goods or services were not supplied for profit-making purposes, Defendant A issued a false tax invoice of KRW 7,897,018,748 in total, as shown in [Attachment List 2].

2) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court: (a) issued a false tax invoice to Defendant A for the purpose of continuing transactions with the customer or expanding new customers or obtaining other economic benefits; and (b) solely based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the lower court issued the false tax invoice for the purpose

It is insufficient to recognize it.

In light of the above, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the grounds of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (such as issuance of false tax invoice).