The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since similar transit, which is sold by the defendant of mistake of facts, is not 9,872,00 liter, but 70% of them, which is not 9,872,00 liter as indicated in the judgment of the court below, only 70% of the tax evaded by the defendant shall be recognized. However, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution, a fine of 2.5 billion won, and five million won of the daily conversion of custody) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the part of the case of the defendant

A. The Defendant made the same assertion as the grounds for appeal concerning the mistake of facts in the judgment of the court below, and the court below rejected the above assertion on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. Examining the reasoning of the judgment below compared with the records, the judgment of the court below is just and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The Defendant did not have any history of punishment for the same kind of crime, and the instant crime was committed on May 1, 2012 by concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the crime of violating the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act, which became final and conclusive on May 1, 2012, in consideration of equity with the case where each of the above crimes was adjudicated at the same time, and the Defendant’s actual gains are deemed not to exceed the evaded tax amount under the transaction structure of the instant case, and there are some favorable circumstances to be considered.

However, the amount of evaded tax due to the crime of this case is about 2.4 billion won, and the crime of this case is not only a substantial distortion of the same trade order, but also a negative influence on the tax payment consciousness of the general public who is performing tax liability in good faith, thereby seriously damaging the tax justice.