Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant shall be the head of C Child Care Center with the wife B 101 Dong 101, Dong 101.

No person shall receive a subsidy or appropriate a subsidy by fraud or other improper means.

1. From October 2015 to February 2016, the Defendant: (a) had a child care teacher D retired from office; (b) had the child care teacher D met the percentage of the infant care teacher as if he/she continued to work with hiding and remaining in office; and (c) claimed subsidies from the head of the Sing-si Population Office, thereby unlawfully receiving KRW 2,40,000 for five months of the teacher’s subsidy.

2. From December 2015 to March 2016, the Defendant unlawfully received the child subsidy of KRW 5,580,000 by the same method as that of the foregoing paragraph (1).

3. The Defendant did not attend a child care center on February 2016;

After registering E as a child with child care and completing the registration, the above E claimed a subsidy to the head of the wife population in Yongsan-si, and received the child subsidy of KRW 1,116,00.

4. On February 2016, the Defendant unlawfully received 2.30,000 won of the relevant anti-school teacher’s subsidy in the same manner as the foregoing paragraph 3.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A statement prepared by the F;

1. A written accusation;

1. Application of statutes on the plan to change the administrative disposition;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Article 54 (2) 1 of the Infant Care Act and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The defendant's crime of this case where the defendant registered a retired teacher as a infant care teacher or registered infant care teacher with reason for sentencing under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order did not cancel his/her intention, and the defendant's crime of this case where he/she received the relevant subsidy without cancelling his/her intention is a crime that impairs the fundamental purpose of the Infant Care Act aimed at promoting the welfare of infants and families, and the subsidy system accordingly.