Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, 10,000.

With respect to the support project for the introduction of low-end buses for the supply of wheelchairss and breast-type buses without stairs, Gangwon-do is a subsidized project operator who has received subsidies from the State pursuant to the provisions of Articles 17 and 19 of the Subsidy Management Act, and the bus companies in Gangnam-si are an indirect subsidy recipient who has received them through Gangnam-si, the indirect subsidy recipient.

The Gangnam-si annually designates and notifies each bus company of the number of low-floor buses to purchase each year, and accordingly, it has paid subsidies for purchasing low-floor buses (the state bears 30% of indirect subsidies under the above law and approximately 50% of Gangwon-do 20% of Gangwon-do 20% of indirect subsidies under the above law) based on the business plan submitted by each bus company.

1. The defendant shall not use the subsidy for any purpose other than its original purpose when he received the indirect subsidy for the low-floor bus introduction support project as the representative director of the corporation B located in Gangnam-si E.

If the Defendant received KRW 299,200,000 from Gangnam-si around June 20, 2012 as the subsidies for the project to introduce low-floor buses in 2012, the Defendant used the indirect subsidy for the purpose of purchasing low-floor buses, despite that the indirect subsidy was used only for the purpose of purchasing low-floor buses. However, on June 20, 2012, the Defendant used the indirect subsidy of KRW 150,000,000 for the corporate operating expenses, such as paying KRW 150,000 as the repayment of the regular funds by employees of the company on June 20, 2012, and from around that time until October 2014, the Defendant used the indirect subsidy of KRW 596,794,000 paid by the State for the purpose of introducing low-floor buses to enhance the transportation convenience of mobility disadvantaged persons, such as in the attached list of crimes.

2. Defendant B, the representative director of the Defendant Company, violated the Subsidy Management Act by using the subsidies for purposes other than the original purpose as described in the above 1.

(i) the evidence;