beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment for one year, Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,500,00, and Defendant C shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A The representative director of the Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) C, the Defendant Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) is a corporation established for the purpose of repairing and repairing cultural properties, repairing and cutting of cultural properties, and Defendant B is the chief director of G in the racing-si.
Defendant
A knew that a subsidized business operator who meets the requirements for restoration, repair, etc. of cultural heritage bears a certain ratio of the expenses incurred in the construction of the cultural heritage, and in collusion with the public knowledge, etc. of the temple allocated the subsidy budget for the repair work of cultural heritage from the victim racing city with the subsidy from the State, local expenses, etc., the victim racing attempted to receive a subsidy from the victim racing city by making an application for the repair work of cultural heritage by pretending to have paid the subsidy to the subsidized business operator, such as inspection, as it has been paid in the
1. Joint crimes committed by Defendant A and Defendant B
A. On August 8, 2012, the Defendants filed an application for subsidies with the effect that “the total cost of KRW 45 million out of the total cost of KRW 225 million shall be borne by G, and the remaining cost of the project shall be KRW 180 million as subsidies,” and the Defendants submitted a letter of self-responsibility with the name of the Defendant under the name of G-known, G, stating that they shall bear self-paid costs in G. The Defendants submitted a letter of self-responsibility to the effect that “the cost of KRW 45 million out of the total cost of KRW 25 million shall be borne by G.”
However, Defendant B did not intend to pay KRW 45 million for a person to be borne by G even if the above company was granted a subsidy, and Defendant A, who was in charge of the construction of the above company, made a deposit of the amount equivalent to the company’s own shares, thereby pretending to pay the G company’s own shares.
After all, the Defendants, as above, deceiving the victim racing market and belong to this, on March 2013.