A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates a sales store for agricultural livestock machinery in Briju City E with the trade name.

G business is comprised of 20% subsidy for livestock development fund, 30% local subsidy, 30% loan and 20% of self-payment (loan 30% can be replaced by self-payment) with subsidy granted through each Si/Gun to farmers and distributors who intend to produce and use research fees in the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.

The Defendant knew that the farmers to receive the above subsidies lack the ability to pay self-chargess, and, after remitting the self-charges to be paid from the farm, he acquired the subsidies by submitting the remittance statement to the Si/Gun, etc. as if the Defendant paid the self-charges from the farm to the farm that acquired the subsidies, and attempted to sell the agricultural machinery to the farm that acquired the subsidies.

The Defendant, at around 2012, knew that, on the condition that a farmer bears approximately 60% of the purchase price for agricultural machinery, he applied for a subsidy as a representative director of an IF corporation to a new management body G business that subsidized part of the purchase price for agricultural machinery. On March 28, 2012, on the condition that on the condition that on March 28, 2012, the victim had the victim borne KRW 81,150,000 of the purchase cost for agricultural machinery, the Defendant was notified of the decision on the subsidy of KRW 75,00,000 on the condition that the victim would bear the cost of 156,150,000,000 of the purchase cost for agricultural machinery.

The Defendant, around June 2012, at the livestock shed located in the Jeonnam-gun J of the Republic of Korea, proposed that the Defendant would not have the ability to pay the said subsidies for the said subsidies. As such, the Defendant first remitted the said subsidies to the Defendant, and then, deposited the funds to the Defendant, and then submitted the documents to the Defendant as if H paid the amount equivalent to his own contributions to the Defendant, and the Defendant did not pay his own contributions upon consent. However, the Defendant did not pay his own contributions.