Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

However, the period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. It is true that the defendant damaged public goods as in the facts charged, but the Gu office rendered two-day suspension of business against the Love Regional Child Center on the ground of unfair claim for subsidies, which led to the defendant's child's failure to listen to the lessons at the above regional child center, the Gu office rejected an application for interview from the employee of the Gu office, which led to the crime of this case.

However, since the above suspension disposition was changed to an improvement order and an unfair claim return order, it is unfair to hold the defendant liable for the crime on the ground that the Gu office was at work in imposing the administrative disposition against the local child center from the beginning, and its liability is borne by the Gu office.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The record of this case reveals that the head of Guro-gu has ordered the above local child center to return KRW 217,00 of subsidies for improvement order and unfair claim amounting to KRW 217,00 on the ground that the former head of the Gu fabricated documents as if one of the children who attended the Green Community Center on December 22, 2016 were falsely present at the meeting for four months, and orders the above local child center to return KRW 217,00 of subsidies for improvement order and unfair claim amounting to KRW 217,00 on the ground that there was no evidence that the head of the Gu ordered the above local child center to suspend its business against the above local child center like the defendant's assertion (the Guro-gu head of the Gu requested consultation about whether the above local child center's business suspension disposition against the above local child center's unfair claim against the law firm 2 location based on the Child Reinstatement Act). Even if the defendant's assertion, the head of the Gu changed the administrative disposition against the above local center

8.2