The judgment below

Of the defendants A, the part of the defendant is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment of one year and six months, and fine of 1,100,000,000 won.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the case of a golf course construction work in the D complex, which was conducted by the misunderstandingr under the so-called “construction work directly managed by the executing company” under the detailed type of public works and directly managing each specialized company, the Defendants actually contracted the construction work and landscaping construction work, or subcontracted the construction work under a contract.

As a result, the tax invoice issued or received by the Defendants does not constitute a false tax invoice as it is related to the goods or services actually provided or provided.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted all the charges of this case that the defendants issued or received false tax invoices with respect to the instant golf course construction work, and there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

B. misunderstanding the legal principles, the Defendants actually executed or subcontracted the instant golf course construction works under a contract for civil and landscaping construction works, which is included in the scope of “construction” under the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.

Nevertheless, the lower court determined that the process performed by the Defendants in relation to the instant golf course construction is not a construction work, and it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(c)

The sentencing of the court below's unfair sentencing (the sentencing of the defendant A is too unreasonable, for the period calculated by converting the above fine of one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant A, and 1.1 billion won of fine for the above fine of 2.2 million won per day, with prison labor for the above imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, provisional payment order for the above imprisonment, fine of 180 million won for the defendant B corporation, and provisional payment order for the above fine).

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

According to the summary information inquiry statement and the text of 1, 2, and 3 of the case submitted by the prosecutor to the trial, Defendant A is at the Daejeon High Court on July 24, 2015.