However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant was the owner of D(4.93 tons) who was a fishing vessel running in the old coastal port at Changwon-si, and was designated as a fishing vessel operating in the fish farm management line for more than two to three years, and used the said fishing vessel exclusively for the management line. However, on March 2017, the Defendant applied for a large amount of repair cost due to frequent breakdown of the ordinary fishing village, but was not selected as a vessel subject to a reduction due to the lack of operational performance, etc., the Defendant was willing to receive a subsidy by making a false application for a reduction of the amount of money to meet the requirements subject to reduction, such as the result of entry and departure, the record of receiving tax-free oil, and the record of fish sales.

Around August 7, 2017, the Defendant reported “Public Notice on Application for Additional Business” at Changwon-si. Around that time, the Defendant received false entry and departure from port, false consignment statement, and false tax-free performance records. Around August 29, 2017, the Defendant submitted an application for reduction accompanied by the said documents to a staff member at Changwon-si’s Changwon-si, who was in charge of the operation of the said D, deceiving the staff member in charge as if the said D was a fishing vessel, and was transferred KRW 97,243,60, under the name of the victim Changwon-si, who was in charge of the management of the aquaculture, to the E business. On November 14, 2017, the Defendant was transferred KRW 97,243,60, under the name of the victim Changwon-si’s subsidies for the closed line.

However, the above D did not operate a fishing vessel that was designated as a fish farm management vessel and used exclusively for the management vessel, and does not fall under the requirements of reduction, and the above documents attached to the application were false.

As a result, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 97,243,660 from the victim, and at the same time received KRW 77,794,940 from the victim as a false application.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made with respect to G and H;

1. Each internal investigation report (the result of attaching and analyzing identification documents, such as an application for D identification, accompanying data for reporting entry into and departure from a port of entry into and departure from ports, attaching data for reporting entry into and departure from ports of Gyeong, attaching data for fishery booming fish plates in the name of D, and for each local government.