As it appears from the evidence material, defendant 1 printed documents bearing the logo of PLANAS in the offices of Migdal and he used them to prepare false supplier accounts. This is clearly evident in the defendant's statement, P/321, in which he explicitly admitted that he had attached supplier accounts on behalf of PLANAS to the import registers , with the intention of reducing the import taxes obligatory. These are customs payments, purchase tax and VAT, which are obligated to be paid, as far as the goods are concerned, which are the subject of charges 9-14.
Therefore, I determine as a fact that defendant 1 was behind the forgery of the supplier certificates on behalf of PLANAS, and he was the one who made use of the reduced supply certificates, whether directly or indirectly. I categorically reject the false claim of defendant 1 that this is an adoption of import transactions, since the ordering of the goods could not afford to pay the consideration for the goods. It appears that this is a fabricated claim from the school of defendant 1, since there is no logic in adopting the transaction, as it were, by way of replacing the original certificate of supplier and bringing in another supplier, which has nothing to do with the import transaction at all. The entire theory relating to the adoption of transactions was born during the trial and in the framework of the tired long testimony of Defendant 1. Needless to say, these things did not come up at all in the interrogation of Defendant 1, and this is especially true of P/321, where he explicitly admitted that the goal he had in mind was to reduce the import taxes, even though he tried to claim that this was done in the name and for the sake of Elhanan Tenenbaum. As I noted, this claim regarding Elhanan Tenenbaum is not acceptable to me, and I have already determined that Tenenbaum had nothing to do with the forgery of the supplier's accounts and did not benefit from the submission of the reduced accounts to the tax authorities. The blame was placed on Tenenbaum's shoulders, in its entirety, to take advantage of the fact that the man was presumed missing and it was unclear when, if at all, he would be released from captivity. There was no difficulty in placing the full responsibility on Tenenbaum, in the absence of a man who could contradict this. The problem is that Elhanan Tenenbaum was eventually released from Hezbollah captivity and testified in court, and in my opinion he gave the truth in his testimony.