1. Of the judgment of the court below of first instance and the judgment of the court below of second, all the remainder, excluding the part of innocence against the defendant's Z.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the punishment imposed on the defendant A A(the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, fines for two years and six months, fines for two billion won, fines for two years and six months, and fines for five hundred million won) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B. The judgment of acquittal should be rendered on the grounds that the crime of violation (tax) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (tax) in the judgment of June 11, 2015 is related to the crime of violation (tax) and the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which became final and conclusive on June 11, 2015, and the res judicata is not effective. However, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges

The punishment sentenced to the first and second instances of sentencing (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years, fines for 2.6 billion won, fines for 2 years and fines for 2 billion won: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years and 6 months, fines for 1.5 billion won) is too unreasonable.

The prosecutor (as to the part of the judgment below of the court below of the second instance), the defendant was the president of the second part of the "AF," and the company was aware of the fact that he was the floating company, so it can sufficiently be recognized that the defendant did not participate in the issuance of false tax invoices and the crime of tax evasion as stated in this part of the facts charged, although he did not participate in the issuance of false tax invoices and the crime of tax evasion

The judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

The punishment sentenced by the second instance judgment of the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, three years of social service, 200 hours) is too uneasy and unfair.

Defendant

Article 37 of the Criminal Act applies to the crimes of the first instance judgment against the defendant and the crimes of the second instance judgment against the defendant in the first instance judgment and the crimes of the second instance judgment against the defendant in the second instance, respectively.