The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant was not the actual manager of the LAF, and the H was the actual manager, and the L was the representative director of the LAF and introduced D upon request by I to introduce a person who may be registered as the representative director of the LAF.

The defendant had no intention to evade taxes or to evade compulsory execution.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant, while running a company C, around 2009, had been in bad credit standing due to the nonperformance of obligation and had been in bad credit standing. As such, the Defendant used another person’s name to register the business.

On October 2010, the defendant, when he registered as a representative director and operated a corporation, received the consent by requesting the representative director, etc. of the company in charge of the settlement of accounts (business operator G) established on March 24, 2008 for the purpose of services and online information provision business with the head office in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, and registered as the business operator by correcting the representative of the company in charge of settlement of accounts in the name of D in the Seo-gu Incheon Tax Office around October 8, 2010.

Accordingly, the defendant registered the business with another person's name for the purpose of evading tax evasion or compulsory execution.

B. Article 11(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act provides that an act of registering a business by using another person’s name for the purpose of evading taxes, and Article 11(2) provides that an act of allowing a business operator to use one’s name and make a registration of a business operator. In light of the content of this provision, legislative purport, and the principle of statutoryism that penal laws should be strictly interpreted, the elements of this provision are cases where the business operator uses or permits another person’s name itself at the registration of a business operator.