However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date of the final judgment.

Defendant

A is a person who conducts cultural heritage repair business, and Defendant B is a well-known of G located in south-gu F at the port of port.

Defendant

A, with the knowledge of the fact that, in performing construction works for restoration, repair, etc. of cultural heritage, a subsidized business operator who meets the requirements will bear a certain ratio of the cost of the remainder with subsidies made by national expenses, local expenses, etc., and in collusion with Defendant B, who is a well-known G who is a subsidized business operator, was allocated the subsidy budget for the repair of cultural heritage from the port of port, in collusion with Defendant B, the subsidized business operator, who is the State and local expenses, was entitled to receive the subsidy from the port of port in the manner of filing an application

From April 2013, the Defendants finally changed to KRW 38,933,000, according to the change in the project cost of KRW 40,000,000 of the total project cost with respect to H reconstruction work of the above G from the Port Viewing Culture and Arts Department of Korea, which is located in the Nam-gu Viewing City, Nam-gu Viewing City 1.

B submitted a letter of self-payment under the name of the G widely known to the effect that the remainder of the project cost 160,000,000 won is to be subsidized as subsidies, and that the subsidy is to be borne by G, and that the subsidy is to be borne by G.

However, the facts are that Defendant B did not intend to bear KRW 40,00,000, which is to be borne by G even if he received a subsidy for the H rebuilding construction of the above G, and Defendant A, who was in charge of the construction of the said construction, voluntarily withdrawn the amount equivalent to his own contributions from his own I to the G account and deposited them into the G account in the name of the said account, Defendant B would be entitled to make the payment of his own contributions by withdrawing it and paying it to Defendant A.

Ultimately, the Defendants, by deceiving the victim of Pohang-si jointly as above and deceiving it from the victim on February 28, 2014, KRW 155,732,80, 77,867.