보조금관리에관한법률위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) is that the entire activity support earnings of the disabled persons of this case, which the defendant provided the disabled persons with " activity support allowances" under the Act on Activity Assistant Services for Persons with Disabilities, fall under indirect subsidies, and are mixed with other money as
It is not possible to see that the defendant arbitrarily used the indirect subsidy as stated in the facts charged.
Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, on the contrary.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged is an indirect assistant who, on November 30, 201, is designated by the head of Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Office as an activity support institution and registered as a business operator on February 5, 2014, provides the disabled persons with services to realize their self-reliance ideology and provides them with services to realize their self-reliance ideology.
75% of the earnings from activity support for persons with disabilities shall be paid to activity support personnel, 25% of the expenses for improvement of treatment of activity support personnel, welfare welfare expenses, and the expenses for welfare projects for persons with disabilities.
The accused shall, as an indirect subsidized project operator, perform the indirect subsidized project with the care of a good manager in accordance with statutes and the purpose of granting indirect subsidies, and shall not use the indirect subsidy for any other purpose.
(1) On January 10, 2014, the Defendant used indirect subsidies of KRW 50,382,125 on 24 occasions from January 10, 2014 to October 13, 2014, including withdrawal of KRW 3,00,000, out of the activity support earnings from the activity support of persons with disabilities deposited in the passbook of the instant center (hereinafter “the instant center”) held by the Defendant for personal purposes, and return them for personal purposes.
(2) The Defendant is the Defendant at the instant center on January 3, 2014.