The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A and B Imprisonment with prison labor of two years and fine of 650,000,000 won, and Defendant C with prison labor of two years.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) supplied goods or services to BO (hereinafter referred to as “BO”) on the part of issuing false tax invoices related to the Defendants’ assertion of mistake of facts, and issued each tax invoice listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 12 and 13 as indicated in the judgment below.

D Each tax invoice listed in No. 11, 14, 16, and 18 of the table of crime Nos. 2, 14, 16, and 18 of the judgment of the court below that D received false tax invoices from L (hereinafter referred to as “L”) is not a false tax invoice under Article 10(3) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, but only the value of supply based on real transactions.

Defendant

A misunderstanding of facts has taken office as a director of D around February 23, 2016, Defendant A is not liable as an accomplice for the part that occurred before Defendant A takes office as a director of D in the facts constituting the crime 1. of the judgment below.

The punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, fine of 650,000,000) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B Since Defendant B resigned from the representative director around April 13, 2015, Defendant B is not liable as an accomplice for the part that occurred after Defendant B resigned the representative director of Defendant B in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below.

The punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended sentence, fine of 650,000,000) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

C. On June 22, 2018, Defendant C was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Northern District Court (Seoul Northern District Court) on October 10, 201, and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 13, 2019. The instant crime committed by Defendant C is in the relationship between fraud for which judgment becomes final and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

The punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment, fine 1,300,000,000) is too unreasonable.

Public prosecutor (defendant A) is false without misconception of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.