The meaning of Article 11-2 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act "a person who shall prepare and issue a tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act"

The phrase “person liable to prepare and issue a tax invoice under the provisions of the Value-Added Tax Act” in Article 11-2(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act shall mean only the person liable to prepare and issue a tax invoice specifically by supplying the goods or services in fact by a person registered as an entrepreneur under the Value-Added Tax Act, and shall not include the entrepreneur who does not have the obligation to prepare and issue a tax invoice under the Value-Adde

Article 11-2 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act

Supreme Court Decision 88Do2337 decided Feb. 28, 1989 (Gong1989,568) 92Do2417 decided Jun. 28, 1994 (Gong1994Ha, 2144) 95Do145 decided Apr. 25, 1995 (Dong)

Defendant

Defendant and Prosecutor

Gwangju District Court Decision 94No781 delivered on December 9, 1994

All appeals are dismissed.

1. We examine the Prosecutor’s grounds of appeal.

Article 11-2 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act provides that "the person who shall prepare and deliver a tax invoice under the provisions of the Value-Added Tax Act" shall mean only the person who is registered as an entrepreneur under the Value-Added Tax Act and is obligated to prepare and deliver a tax invoice specifically by supplying the goods or services in fact, and shall not include any business operator who is not obligated to prepare and deliver a tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act because he actually fails to supply the goods to any person (see Supreme Court Decision 92Do2417, Jun. 28,

In the same purport, the court below held that the defendant's act of operating a limited company of alcoholic beverage wholesalers and selling alcoholic beverages equivalent to 115,907,086 won in total on several occasions between May 31, 1991 and December 31, 1993 to the operators of entertainment establishments in the net city, and thus, the defendant is obligated to prepare and deliver a tax invoice to the above operators. Thus, as shown in the annexed list of crimes in the judgment below, the non-indicteds listed in the annexed list of crimes in 238 who did not actually receive the above alcoholic beverages, as shown in the annexed list of crimes in the judgment below, did not constitute Article 11-2 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.

In addition, the theory of lawsuit in this case can be deemed to include the act of making a false entry in each tax invoice issued to the operators of entertainment establishments who actually sold alcoholic beverages, etc., instead of making a false entry in each tax invoice against the above non-indicted who did not actually sell alcoholic beverages, etc., and the court below should have found the defendant guilty as to the facts charged in this case. However, the court below's decision that found the defendant not guilty as to the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles as to Article 11-2 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations. However, the court below's decision that found the defendant guilty as to the facts charged in this case is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to Article 11-2 (1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, but it is clear

2. We examine the Defendant’s grounds of appeal.

As in the case of this case, the judgment of the court below on which a fine of KRW 700,00 is imposed shall not be considered as the grounds for appeal on the grounds that the amount of punishment is unreasonable.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jae-soo (Presiding Justice)