Defendants are not guilty.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a corporation established for the purpose of building construction business, etc., and Defendant A as the representative director of the said B corporation on April 29, 2010, who was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of 8 months for the purpose of fraud in the Sungnam branch of the Suwon District Court for the purpose of fraud

5. 7. The sentence became final and conclusive. A.

Defendant

A around May 16, 2008, the Defendant prepared and issued a sales tax invoice as if he had had a construction work equivalent to KRW 5.49939 billion in supply value to the said age club although he did not supply goods or services at the site of the Egym clubs located in Gwangju Mine-gu.

B. Defendant B Co., Ltd. issued the above tax invoice as to the Defendant’s business at the above date, time, and place.

2. The Defendants asserted that although Defendant A issued one of the above sales tax invoices at the time and time stated in the above facts charged, the Defendants asserted that the above sales tax invoice cannot be deemed to have been prepared falsely, since Defendant B, operated by Defendant A, actually proceeded with the construction work of the above club.

3. Determination

A. “Profit-making purpose” under Article 8-2(1) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 9919, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter “former Aggravated Punishment Act”) refers to the purpose of widely acquiring economic benefits.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do9592, Oct. 27, 2011); and “a person who has issued or received a tax invoice without supplying goods or services under the Value-Added Tax Act” under Article 11-2(4) of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 9919, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter “former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act”).