A Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and for a defendant B, for eight months, respectively.

, however, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[criminal power] On October 30, 2014, Defendant A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act at the Seoul Central District Court on October 30, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 7, 2014. Defendant B was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a period of eight months for fraud in the Daegu District Court Kimcheon branch on February 26, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 14, 2015.

【Criminal Facts】

1. From November 1, 1989 to May 13, 2013, Defendant A, as the representative director of the company H specialized in sewage treatment facilities and livestock wastewater treatment facilities business in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, was in charge of the business affairs of the Defendants. Defendant B was actually in charge of the Yong-Nam branch office and Gyeongbuk branch office of the company in charge of the dispute resolution, and Defendant B was in charge of the business affairs of the company, and Defendant B was in charge of the J Farming Cooperative, the strong branch office of the H in charge

2. Defendant A’s crime aware that Defendant A subsidized 80% of the total construction cost as a subsidy (State subsidy and local government subsidy) to a farmer who intends to install a liquid oil storage tank (storage tank that serves as storage effect for 4-6 months) as part of measures to support farmers in accordance with the implementation of the London Convention prohibiting the dumping of livestock into the sea by the State and local governments, creation of the foundation for environment-friendly livestock farming industry, etc., Defendant A intended to receive 80% of the total construction cost from a farmer who did not have the intent or ability to pay the total construction cost in collusion with a farmer who did not have the intent or ability to pay the 20% of the total construction cost, to fully or partially exempt himself/herself from the total construction cost, and to receive the subsidy by submitting a written construction contract to each local government, as seen above, as the person who paid the farmer, as well as by submitting a construction contract and a detailed statement of construction cost.

Accordingly, Defendant A is equivalent to KRW 34 million of the total construction cost ( KRW 6.8 million of the self-charge, KRW 27.2 million of the subsidy) from the time when the M of Farmers operating L farms in Ansan-si around May 201.