2. The judgment of the court below is against the defendant's confession of the crime of this case, the amount of damage of this case is relatively less than the amount of damage of this case, the amount of subsidy received by the defendant is not used individually, but used for D agricultural water, electric power facilities, etc., and the victim's military forces forces have recovered the full amount of subsidy from the defendant. However, the crime of unlawfully receiving subsidies from the local government is disadvantageous to the defendant, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the crime of this case, and means and consequence of the crime of this case, and all of the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, such as circumstances after the crime, criminal records, etc., and thus the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the phrase “1. Induction” in the application of the law of the court below ex officio shall be corrected as the phrase “B” under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which was amended by Act No. 12575 of May 14, 2014, which was amended by Act No. 12575 of May 14, 2014.

.