The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

A fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of ex officio destruction, the Defendant may be found to have been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year [2011 order, 474, 2011 order, 966 (Merger)] and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 7, 2011 at the Seo-gu District Court Branch of the Daegu District Court as of September 1, 201.

Since the crime of this case is related to the crime subject to the above final judgment and the crime subject to the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity in the case of concurrent judgment pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Since the application of the statutes of the lower judgment was omitted, the reason for ex

Pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and the following judgment shall be rendered again after pleading

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting a crime and the evidence admitted by the court as stated in the judgment below is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for adding "The defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) at the Seo-gu District Court Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court on September 1, 2011, and such judgment became final and conclusive on December 7, 2011" to the first head of the facts constituting a crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, and thus,

Application of Statutes

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

1. The latter part of Articles 37 and 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes (the crimes of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and the violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc., for which the judgment becomes final);

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is not prepared and issued a tax invoice to avoid detection of the illegal act while the defendant supplied pseudo petroleum manufacturers with goods such as softs, etc.