The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Since the Defendant, in the part of fraud by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, submitted a statement of balance with the amount temporarily borrowed in order to select a person eligible for the subsidy, and judged that it would be necessary to appropriate the subsidy while actually performing the construction work, there was no intention of deception, and the victim full-scale (hereinafter referred to as " full-scale") was paid the amount calculated by the rate of the contribution of the construction work and the ratio of the contribution to the treasury, it cannot be said that there was deception.

Even if the balance certificate was prepared in the amount temporarily borrowed from the part in violation of the Subsidy Management Act and was selected as the subsidy recipient, since the contribution was made during the construction process, it does not constitute “the receipt of the subsidy by false application or other unlawful means” as prescribed by the Act.

The lower court’s imprisonment (three years of imprisonment) against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The following facts can be acknowledged according to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below on the finding of facts of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles.

On January 201, 2010, it publicly announced "the recruitment of fishery products distribution and processing facilities business (hereinafter "the business of this case") in 2010" that grants subsidies of KRW 300,000,000 at the expense of the State, military expense of KRW 300,000,000,000 for the total project cost of KRW 1 billion to an individual corporation selected as a subsidized business operator.

However, in order to be selected as a subsidized project operator, it is necessary to secure the site for processing factory facilities, to secure 400 million won of the applicant's name, and to receive the subsidy after being selected as a subsidized project operator, it is subject to the execution of the subsidy first.

On February 18, 2010, the Defendant submitted the instant project application in the name of the JJ, one of its own children, and accordingly, the Defendant has the ability to execute its own contributions in cash.