A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination is a large amount of money obtained by the Defendant through each of the instant frauds exceeding KRW 170 million, and the type of subsidy frauds, such as each of the instant frauds, may result in not only the payment of subsidies to the project to be actually provided but also the financial soundness of the State, which may cause serious risk to the financial soundness of the State, and thus, there is a need to strictly punish the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant led to the confession of each of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake, that the defendant made efforts to recover the damage of the victim by repaying the amount up to KRW 120 million to the Human Resources Development Service of Korea, making changes in deposit or subrogated repayment, etc., and that the defendant has no record of punishment except for the punishment of fines imposed on the defendant due to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act in 1987.

In addition, since there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that can be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, the following facts are comprehensively considered in light of the records and various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, including the background of each of the instant crimes, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the Defendant’s environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or it is deemed unfair as it is fluent. Therefore, the above assertion

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.