A. In fact-misunderstanding or legal principles, the Defendant actually employed the F, G, and H (hereinafter “F”) to pay KRW 1.6 million per month. However, since part of the wage was invested by F, etc. from F, etc., even though the Defendant was unaware of employment in the course of receiving subsidies for employment promotion, or did not intend to defraud the Defendant, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The lower court’s sentence (2.00,000 won 5,000 won) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts (A) The deception as a requirement for fraud refers to all affirmative or passive acts that have to be followed by each other in the transactional relationship with property, and it does not necessarily require false indication as to the important part of a juristic act, and it is sufficient if it is related to the facts that form the basis of the judgment for allowing an actor to perform the act of disposal of property he wishes by omitting the other party into mistake (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do5774, Oct. 28, 2005). The following circumstances are revealed according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court.

(1) The subsidies for promotion of employment is a subsidy granted to an employer who employs an unemployed person meeting the prescribed requirements among those who registered job seeking to the employment security office or other agencies prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Labor in order to promote the employment of those who have particular difficulty in finding a job under the ordinary conditions of the labor market [Article 23 of the Employment Insurance Act and Article 26 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Employment Insurance Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27738, Dec. 30, 2016; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree of the Employment Insurance Act”)]. The above unemployed is “successful failure in employment” operated by the Ministry of Labor.