The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months, and a fine of 1,500,000,000 won.

The defendant above.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of one year and six months, the fine of one thousand five hundred thousand won,00 won) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The prosecutor added the title “1.F-related crimes” to the first sentence of the instant facts charged at the trial, and added the title “2.W-related crimes” to the lower part of the instant facts charged, “The Defendant would give KRW 30 to KRW 35 per non-ferrousg, if the Defendant issued false tax invoices by pretending to engage in scrap metal transactions with R around June 2013, along with C.

The proposal is made by R to establish "W" as a "large Carbon Business," which is a "large Carbon Business," whose member X is located in Ansan-si around July 1, 2013, and then issue a false tax invoice to G in the name of "W".

It is suggested that G transferred money by pretending the transaction price to the account in the name of “W”, and R has the intent to divide the profits from selling false tax invoices by operating the term “data” together with the purpose of operating the term “data” in the name of “W” and “W” to play the role of issuing false tax invoices and reporting value added taxes in cash by withdrawing the money deposited in the name of the transaction price.

Accordingly, R around July 10, 2013, at W Office in Pyeongtaek-si: (a) although there was no fact that L had supplied Boan Industries Co., Ltd. with no scrap metal such as waste, it issued a tax invoice by issuing one copy of the supply price to Boan Industry Co., Ltd.; and (b) as shown in attached Table 2, L issued false tax invoice amounting to KRW 5,372,324,680 in total supply price to Boan Industry Co., Ltd., as shown in attached Table 2.

“Application for Amendments to Bill of Indictment was filed by adding the facts charged, and this Court permitted this, thereby changing the subject of the adjudication.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. Conclusion