Relationship under Article 11-2 (1) and (2) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act;

Article 11-2(1) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 4812, Dec. 22, 1994); Article 11-2(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4812, Dec. 2, 1994) provides that a business operator registered under the Value-Added Tax Act, who shall prepare and deliver a tax invoice by supplying goods or services, shall be punished when the supplier of goods or services fails to deliver a tax invoice intentionally, or makes a false statement in the tax invoice; Article 11-2(1) of the same Act provides that a person who shall submit a tax invoice to the Government pursuant to the provisions of the Value-Added Tax Act shall be punished when he/she does not receive the tax invoice by assault, intimidation, instigate, aid, or conspiracy, or receives a false tax invoice; thus, each of the above provisions differs from the subject of the crime and the amount of punishment. Thus, in light of Article 1

Article 11-2 (1) and (2) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 4812 of Dec. 22, 1994)

Defendant corporation

Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 94No2924, 3793 decided Feb. 15, 1995

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Article 11-2(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 4812, Dec. 22, 1994); Article 11-2(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4812, Dec. 2, 1994) provides that a business operator registered under the Value-Added Tax Act who intends to punish a person who shall prepare and deliver a tax invoice by supplying goods or services fails to deliver a tax invoice intentionally or makes a false statement in the tax invoice; Article 11-2(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 4812, Dec. 2, 1994); and Article 11-2(1) of the same Act provides that a person who shall submit a tax invoice from a supplier of goods or services pursuant to the provisions of the Value-Added Tax Act shall be punished when he/she does not receive the tax invoice from the supplier of goods or services by assault, intimidation, instigate, instigate, or conspiracy, shall not violate the principle of equity or corporation liability.

The court below is just in holding that the defendant's representative director, etc. committed a crime under Article 11-2 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act by failing to issue a tax invoice as stated in its holding, and that the amount of a fine of 50 million won or less within the limit of two times the amount calculated by applying the tax rate of value-added tax to the supply value determined by applying the joint penal provisions of Article 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act to the corporate defendant, which is a corporation

All arguments are without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Don-hee (Presiding Justice)