1. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months;

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[2] On July 21, 2016, Defendant A was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence for a violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act in the Busan District Court’s Dong Branch Branch, and on July 29, 2016, Defendant A was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence for six months. On July 29, 2016, the above judgment was finalized. On July 21, 2017, this court was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence for a violation of the Illegal Check Act. On July 29, 2017, the above judgment was finalized.

F Joint Defendant was indicted in this case, but the prosecution was dismissed upon death.

In collusion with Defendant A and Defendant A and B, “G” as the representative of Defendant A, “I” as the representative of the victim H, and “I” as if there was no actual transaction, the false tax invoice is made by the supplier of “G”, “I” as if there was no actual transaction; even if the amount of value-added tax is received from the victim H in the process of issuing the same, the tax authority did not have the intent or ability to pay value-added tax.

Nevertheless, on January 11, 2014, Defendant B issued a false tax invoice amounting to KRW 36 million with the victim’s “G B” from the victim’s house (J, 101 Dong 205, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, 101 Dong 205) and with the supplier of I as the supplier of I, Defendant B would be entitled to refund by filing a return of value added tax at the State tax office.

‘Falsely speaking' and its affiliation was divided into F and Defendant A by receiving KRW 33 million from the injured party under the pretext of value added tax.

As a result, F and the Defendants conspired to acquire 33 million won from the injured party.

[The defendant A/Defense Counsel received part of the money given to the injured party through F. However, since this money was delivered to the injured party and the issuance of the false tax invoice was different, there was no criminal intent or conspiracy for defraudation.