The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of eight months and the suspension of execution of two years) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the mistake, there are circumstances to consider the circumstance in which the Defendant used the subsidy differently from the specified purpose, and that the Defendant constitutes the grounds for disqualification of an executive officer of a social welfare foundation in the event the suspended sentence of imprisonment is finalized due to the instant crime.

However, in light of the purport of the State’s granting subsidies to a subsidized project operator and the amount of useful subsidies, the Defendant’s crime of this case is with heavy nature of the crime, there is no change in circumstances to change the sentencing of the court below in the trial, and the judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

In full view of the fact that it is difficult to see the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, various sentencing conditions shown in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.