All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (unfair sentencing) (two years of suspended sentence in the period of eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. A prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of sentencing) 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 27,50,000 won received from G in return for revolving transactions through the receipt of false tax invoices. Since the Defendant aided the receipt of false tax invoices to help promote sales from G, the Defendant can recognize “for-profit purposes” and thus, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Delivery of False Tax Invoice) was established, but the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the reasons, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact-misunderstanding and the fact-finding by the prosecutor, the criminal appellate court held that the prosecutor’s assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles has the nature of ex post facto trial while having the nature of a post facto trial, and in light of the spirit of substantial direct trial as prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Act, etc., there is insufficient evidence to exclude reasonable doubts after the first instance court conducted the examination of evidence

In a case where a not-guilty verdict is rendered on the facts charged, if it does not reach the degree to sufficiently resolve a reasonable doubt raised by the first instance trial as a result of the appellate trial’s trial, there is an error of misconception of facts in the first instance judgment that lacks evidence of crime solely on such circumstance

F. Upon concluding that the facts charged are not guilty (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do14516, Apr. 28, 2016). The lower court: (a) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated; (b) if the instant transaction is issued with a sales account statement to C operated by the Co., Ltd. and the Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd., the sales account statement is issued to C; and (c) the instant transaction account statement is issued to C; and (d) the