조세포탈죄의 진정신분범 여부에 관한 고찰

It was universal to understand that the perpetrators are limited to taxpayers as it presupposes the duty of tax payment and that joint penal provision has been set forth to punish the legally responsible person as the void of punishment occurs with the limitation of perpetrators to taxpayers. However, the establishment of tax liability falls under ‘Status’ in article 33 of the Criminal Act, since the act, defined as ‘the status in which requirements for taxation are objectively fulfilled,’ corresponds to external & objective perpetrator-related elements. Yet, regardless of whether tax is occasionally or periodically levied, the tax liability will have a temporary nature since tax liability will be valid until ‘a certain timing when requirements for taxation are objectively fulfilled.’ Moreover, ‘Status’ pursuant to article 33 of the Criminal Act requires continuity in its conceptual framework, thus, interpretations that include the establishment of tax liabilities of a temporary nature go beyond its semantic constraints and thus cannot be accepted. Therefore, the crime of tax evasion does not constitute a crime caused by social position(a crime in which a person’s status is an element) under article 33 of the Criminal Act. Moreover, considering the intentions of legislators at the time of enacting the Punishment of Tax Offenses Act, and logical/systematic interpretations of joint penal provisions in other laws and other provisions in the Punishment of Tax Offenses Act, laws and regulations on tax evasion are not designed to limit the scope of perpetrators; instead, the joint penal provisions of the Punishment of Tax Offenses Act address the penal sanctions of corporations legislatively. Thus, the crime of tax evasion is not a crime caused by social position crime under article 33 of the Criminal Act, and the provisions on tax evasion do not limit the scope of perpetrators either.