The Defendant is the head of Seosan E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, M,O, P, Q, and R are farmers belonging to the Seosan Eth Eth, and “S”.

C directed D et al., a business operator of B, to conduct the business of “B to pay money and valuables, or to pay a price equivalent to the selection of the supplier” with the receipt of the project cost when designating B as the supplier. The non-business employees of B Co., Ltd. carried out the business by making the aforementioned remarks to farmers according to their instructions, and the farmers who were the subsidized business operators agreed to do so and applied for the subsidy and other project cost, thereby soliciting the Defendant to receive the subsidies by calculating the excessive amount of the project cost, even though the subsidy does not constitute the project cost.

On April 16, 2013, the Defendant received a proposal from the employees, such as D, “B to return money after the completion of the business,” and received an application for payment of subsidies of KRW 28,60,000,000 of the project cost for 15 vehicles for the 15 vehicles for power-driven transportation, such as agricultural power-driven transportation vehicles (W), in order to obtain a proposal from the employees, such as D, to return money after the completion of the business,” and on September 16, 2013.

However, the actual cost of the project was KRW 24.3 million [the cost of the project 28.6 million - (the cash amount paid to the defendant in October 10, 2013)].

As a result, the Defendant, in collusion with C, D, and nameless B employees, deceiving the victim, and obtained 22,525,000 won (28,60,000 won - 6,075,000 won from the Defendant’s agricultural account under the name of the Defendant around September 16, 2013) from the victim.

2. The subsidy of this case is determined.