beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (the 3 years of suspended execution and the 320 million won of fine for one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, with a discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area of the first instance
In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court rendered a sentence against each Defendant by taking account of favorable circumstances that are favorable to the fact that the act of receiving false tax invoices, such as the instant crime, would seriously impede the exercise of the State’s legitimate right to tax collection, thereby impairing the sound order of commercial transactions, and causing harm to the public’s compliance consciousness by faithfully performing the duty to pay taxes. The Defendant’s act of receiving false tax invoices, under the circumstances that the number of times the act of receiving false tax invoices reaches KRW 21,10,000, the total amount of supply value reaches KRW 3,110,015,000, and the Defendant recognized both criminal acts from the investigative agency, and reflects the Defendant’s mistake.
In the past, there was no special normal data to change the sentencing circumstances in the past.
The court below held.