Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to mixing with national subsidies.

2. Determination

A. “C”, which is a communal home facility (the well-known group home), as prescribed by the Child Welfare Act in the facts charged in the instant case, is established and operated as a representative director in around 2006, by establishing a “C” as an incorporated association, and operating a communal home facility.

From April 2011, the Defendant received 140,000 won (a total of 3,382,590 won for personnel expenses and operating expenses of the Defendant and infant care worker E) from the head of the Seoul Southernbuk-gu, on April 26, 201, upon receipt of a request for KRW 1,440,000 as personnel expenses of infant care worker E, from the head of the Seoul Gangnam-gu, and paid them to E.

The defendant shall faithfully implement a subsidized project with due care as a good manager in accordance with the details of the decision to grant the subsidy, and shall not use the subsidy for other purposes.

Nevertheless, on April 30, 2011, the Defendant returned KRW 3,90,00,00 to E, out of the personnel expenses paid to E from the above “C” facility via C’s account in the name of an incorporated association, and used 4,770,000 won in total from the Defendant to March 26, 2012, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table, for the Defendant’s activity expenses, community home operation expenses, and various expenses, contrary to the purpose of subsidies determined by returning the total amount of KRW 4,770,00

Accordingly, the defendant is personnel expenses of E, which is a nurse for communal home facilities.