2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year;

3. However, for a period of two years from the date this ruling becomes final and conclusive.

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. We also examine each unfair argument of sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor.

Each of the crimes of this case is to eliminate the purpose of the state subsidy system, and it is disadvantageous to the extent that the crime is not highly good due to poor methods of crime, the total amount of subsidies obtained by the defendant is KRW 358,950,00, and the total amount of the State subsidies granted by unlawful means exceeds KRW 179,498,50,00, and the damage has not been completely recovered until now.

On the other hand, if the defendant confessions all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake in depth, deducts the boiler price, installation costs, etc. paid to the manufacturer of the heating pellets of this case, the actual profits acquired by the defendant from each of the crimes of this case are only part of the total amount of fraud, and the defendant deposited KRW 53 million in the court below for the victims, and additionally deposited KRW 220 million in the court below for the victims. Each of the crimes of this case shall be considered in the relation of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act with other criminal crimes for which the judgment has become final and conclusive, and at the same time, it shall be considered equity with the case where the judgment has become final and conclusive, and the defendant has been detained for a considerable period of time, and there are family members to support the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, and other various sentencing conditions shown in the instant records and arguments, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's improper argument of sentencing is justified and the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and therefore, Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.