Defendants are acquitted.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who served as a director in the distribution division of the D (D) Dominic Air conditioning in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from June 1, 2008 to June 1, 2013, and Defendant B, from around 2006 to June 1, 2013, who served as the head of the livestock industry team in the said distribution division.

The Defendants received a proposal to receive false sales and purchase statements from the side of the E(Seoul Office) Seoul Office, which is the customer of the D(State) Doctrine, so that they can raise the sales performance between the two companies.

On June 22, 2009, the Defendants, in collusion, issued or received a false statement of the total value of 14,102,01,937 won, without supplying or being supplied goods or services for profit-making purposes as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Form from February 3, 2010.

2. In order to establish a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (issuance, etc. of False Tax Invoice) due to the number of falsified sales and purchase tax invoices, the above subjective elements of “for-profit purposes” should be satisfied. The purpose of profit-making is part of the constituent elements that the prosecutor must prove to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

Constitutional Court en banc Order (see, e.g., Constitutional Court en banc Order 2012Hun-Ba217, 253, 2013Hun-Ba268, 278, and 278, Dec. 26, 2013). Here, “for profit-making purposes” refers to the purpose of acquiring economic benefits widely. As such, “for profit-making purposes” refers to the purpose of widely acquiring economic benefits, such as the purpose of maintaining or receiving orders by withdrawing sales, and the purpose of obtaining loans from banks by making false transaction records.