사기등
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Punishment of the crime
The Defendant is a person who operates the “E Child Care Center” in Yangsan-si D.
1. He/she shall not receive or cause any other person to receive child care fees and child care allowances without compensation by fraud or other improper means in violation of the Infant Care Act;
A. On April 2014, the Defendant: (a) entered the childcare center around June 2014; (b) however, (c) entered the childcare center around June 2014, the Defendant falsely entered the childcare integrated information system (CIS); and (d) entered the childcare center from around April 2014 to May 31, 2014; and (c) falsely entered the childcare integrated information system (CIS).
As a result, the Defendant received 720,280,000 basic childcare fees and 694,000,000,000,000,000 from public officials in charge of mass viewing and viewing.
B. On October 2014, the Defendant entered the Child Care Integrated Information System (CIS) as of October 13, 2014 and falsely entered the record of attendance, although the Defendant did not have been admitted to the Child Care Center at the Child Care Center (IS).
As a result, the Defendant received 861,400 won in total, including 593,480 won in total, 236,400 won in childcare, 31,520 won in care for the elderly, and 861,400 won in childcare.
2. Violation of Acts on the management of subsidies, and fraud;
A. In order to deny the receipt of a concurrent allowance of KRW 75,00 per month for the head of a child care center, even though the Defendant was in office as the head of a child care center and did not concurrently hold office as the head of the child care center, the Defendant’s illegal receipt of a subsidy for improving the working environment of teachers (school teacher’s concurrent support) for the purpose of denying the receipt of a concurrent allowance of KRW 75,000 per month for the head of the child care center. The fact in the above child care center around March 2014 was not organized and operated separately in the case of E child care center, despite the fact that the number of years in spring was not operated separately, the Defendant arbitrarily