A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months and by a fine for 1,00,000 won, and imprisonment for four months and a fine for 500,000 won, respectively.

1. The violation of the Local Finance Act and occupational embezzlement “C” are a business that, for the purpose of fostering a start-up enterprise by Jeollabuk-do, sets a proposal for business start-up for less than three years in the Do and then confirms the outcome of the relevant project. The Defendants also operated the “E” located in Jeonbuk-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Jeonbuk-gu, a local government-subsidized project operator.

A local government-subsidized project operator shall faithfully perform a local government-subsidized project with the care of a good manager in accordance with statutes, the details of the decision to grant local subsidies, or the disposition of the head of a local government under statutes, and he/she shall not use the relevant local subsidy for any other purpose. The Defendants participated in the above C and recruited to use the subsidy for living expenses

After submitting a “G” business plan to (G)F at the above E office around September 2017 in accordance with the contents of the above public offering, the Defendants submitted the same year.

9. Around 18.18. The subsidies of KRW 20 million were paid from Jeollabuk-do to the account under the name of the Defendant A and was kept for business purposes, and was embezzled by voluntarily consuming them with living expenses, new products development expenses, etc., and at the same time used local subsidies for other purposes.

2. When a local government-subsidized project operator in violation of the Local Finance Act completes a local government-subsidized project, he/she shall prepare a performance report on the local government-subsidized project and submit it to the head of the local government, and shall not prepare and submit a false performance report, as described in paragraph 1, the Defendants conspired to prepare and submit a false performance report to conceal the use of the local subsidy for other purposes.

Accordingly, Defendants entered into a false contract with I as if they contracted the above “G” service with H on October 2017, and issued false electronic tax invoices, and issued false electronic tax invoices on October 2018.