The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and two months.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles with respect to the remaining workers except V, Defendant A believed the end of Defendant B that the said workers actually worked for the instant social company, and approved the application form for personnel expenses subsidies and the attendance book prepared by B, etc., and there was no deception or interference with public duties by fraudulent means in collusion with Defendant B.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended sentence in August) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s imprisonment (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, the lower court rejected Defendant A’s assertion by specifically explaining the same grounds for appeal as that of Defendant A.

Examining the records in comparison with the evidence legitimately adopted and investigated by the court below, such judgment of the court below is just, and it can be sufficiently recognized that Defendant A, in collusion with Defendant B, deceiving the Geumcheon-gu Office for Victims and defrauding money, and interfere with the legitimate execution of duties of public officials belonging to Geumcheon-gu Office by deceptive means.

The statement of the witness B or the evidence submitted by the defense counsel does not obstruct the acknowledgement of the facts of crime, and there is no other evidence to reverse it.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

(2) The Defendant A deposited 6 million won on behalf of the victim of unfair sentencing.

However, in light of the status and role of Defendant A in the instant association, even though he was aware of the illegal receipt due to the registration of false workers, he did not know about the operation of the social company, but did not seem to have a serious reflective light, such as transferring all responsibility to Defendant B.

In addition, the motive of the instant crime, etc.