The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years and six months, and a fine of two billion won.

The defendant above.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles [the part on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) (the part on the issuance, etc. of false tax invoices)] A) The Defendant, on behalf of the intermediate distributor, issues tax invoices and invoices (hereinafter “tax invoices”) to the trading partner of the intermediate distributor, issues tax invoices after cash transactions, or substantially operates the Defendant.

G as it is divided into C, ABD, and ABD, there was a real transaction, such as issuing a tax invoice different from the actual transaction according to the movement of business members, but only issuing a tax invoice different from the issue of the tax calculation.

Therefore, it is unreasonable to apply Article 8-2(1) of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act, which requires the establishment of “for-profit purposes”, inasmuch as the Defendant had no purpose of profit-making to evade taxes or obtain other economic benefits.

B) Even if the purpose of profit-making is recognized to the Defendant, a separate transaction entity, such as C, A, D, and A, the Bank of Bankruptcy, has issued a false tax invoice, and thus, the supply price should be added up by each company of the tax obligor.

Therefore, it is unreasonable to punish the supply value of false tax invoices issued by the above three enterprises as a single comprehensive crime of specific crime aggravated violation of the specific crime (such as issuance of false tax invoices) by aggregating the supply value of false tax invoices issued by the above three enterprises

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (a 3 years of imprisonment, 5 years of suspended execution, and 1.2 billion won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence sentenced by the prosecutor (unfair sentencing) by the court below is too unfasible and unfair.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant and prosecutor prior to the determination of ex officio.

A. Amendments to Bill of Indictment (the part on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (Delivery of False Tax Invoice, etc.)) 1) A prosecutor shall reach the judgment of the court below for the first time, and the facts charged in the case 266 case.