beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act due to the submission of a list of the total tax invoices by false purchasing companies among the facts charged in the instant case, and convicted the remainder of the facts charged.
However, since the defendant filed an appeal only for the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below on the grounds of mistake of facts and illegality of sentencing, and the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court below is separated due to the failure of both the defendant and the prosecutor to appeal the acquittal portion, the scope of the trial of the court below
2. Summary of reasons for appeal;
A. Fact-misunderstanding G and H are companies that exist separate from the F operated by the Defendant, and the Defendant actually supplied goods to G and H and prepared and submitted a list of accounts of different sources of sales.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, which found that the list of total accounts of separate accounts with false entries was submitted to the government.
B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the penalty amounting to KRW 20 million) is too unreasonable.
3. Determination
A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant argued that this part of the appeal is similar to the grounds for appeal, and the court below rejected the above assertion and found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in detail by stating in detail the ruling as the title "the judgment as to the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion" from 8 to 17 of the judgment of the court below 3, 3, 8 through 4. In light of the records of this case, the court below's decision is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding of facts.
subsection (b) of this section.
This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.
B. Determination on the unfair argument of sentencing is examined, and the defendant has no record of punishment exceeding the fine.