All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of the facts is merely the fact that the Defendant received benefits from I and overall management of the gas station as indicated in the judgment of the court below, and the Defendant’s failure to perform the role outside the role of aiding and abetting is not a joint principal offender’s crime liability. However, the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the submission of the list of the total tax invoices by the purchasing agency, among the facts charged in the instant case, was erroneous.

(2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (the amount of KRW 6 million) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the registration of another person’s business, among the facts charged in this case, that the Defendant was not a mere employee of the gas station as indicated in the lower judgment, but a de facto manager.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too unfortunate and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In order for a common principal to establish a judgment as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, it is necessary to fact that a crime is committed through a functional control by a common intent as a subjective element and an objective element. As such, the intention to jointly process as a subjective element is insufficient to recognize another person’s crime and not to restrain it, but to accept it. The intention to jointly process as a subjective element is a single element for committing a specific criminal act with a common intent, and it should be the fact that one uses another’s act to carry out his own intention (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do576, Apr. 7, 200). He returned to the instant case, and examined the facts recognized by the lower court based on the macro-made evidence.