Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. As to the fraud related to the false career certificate 1), the Defendant did not know that he did not participate in the preparation of a false career certificate, and the Defendant did not know that he did not know that he had engaged in the preparation of a false career certificate for at least three years in the same facilities as the qualification criteria for the head of the facility, or that he did not have an intention to commit fraud (hereinafter “the first note”).

(2) As to the fraud related to the personnel expenses for substitute personnel, the Defendant prepared the relevant documents in the name of a person who is in charge of all overtime work and did not actually work in violation of the working hours as stipulated under the Labor Standards Act, but in the process, there was no intention to commit fraud or fraud, since the Defendant erroneously stated the grounds for the disbursement as subsidies, not the corporation contributions, due to error in business or negligence in the process.

(3) As to the fraud related to personnel expenses for substitute personnel, the Defendant worked as a facility manager only until June 2013, and from July 2013, the Defendant was dismissed from the facility manager and served as the facility manager. As such, the Defendant did not engage in the commission of the crimes listed in the [Attachment 6] to 12 [Attachment 6] list of crimes (hereinafter “Chapter 3”).

B. B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of three million won is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We first examine the first and second text of the determination of mistake of facts.

The Defendant and the defense counsel asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in the original judgment, and the lower court rejected the allegation and its decision in detail under the title of “determination on the argument of the Defendant and the defense counsel” of the original judgment.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below's above fact-finding and determination are made.