beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant is a person who cultivates crops by using water supply facilities in E in E, and D is a representative director of F Co., Ltd. established for the purpose of producing, selling, etc. the re-production and distribution of the agricultural temperature located in E, E, in E, in E.
As part of the energy use efficiency project since 2012, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry established a 50% of the total project cost when farmers pay 50% of the total project cost (hereinafter “self-charges”) as part of the energy use efficiency project. The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry implemented a project to support the installation of energy-saving facilities that subsidize 50% of the remainder as national expenses, Do expenses, Si expenses, Gun expenses, etc.
The Defendant, who is a subsidized business entity, did not bear all or part of the amount to be borne by the Defendant, or agreed to bear only part of the amount to be borne by the Defendant on the condition of additional construction, but intended to obtain the amount of the subsidy from the victim debate city by making a false financial transaction statement and a false estimate as if the Defendant paid the full amount of the self-paid
Around March 2013, the Defendant conspired with D and submitted 23,400,000 won of the Defendant’s share of KRW 46,80,000 (23,400,000 of subsidies, and KRW 23,400,00 of the Defendant’s share of KRW 23,40,000 of the Defendant’s share of the Defendant’s total amount of the Defendant’s share of KRW 46,80,00,00 of the Defendant’s share of the Defendant’s business.
However, in fact, the Defendant received KRW 23,400,000 from the said Co., Ltd. F in the name of the Defendant, and made a false statement of financial transaction in order to pretend that the Defendant would have borne the total amount of the project cost, even though the Defendant had decided not to bear the charges, such as remitting it to the head of the F Co., Ltd. (CF) in the name of the said Defendant.
In collusion with D, the Defendant is affiliated with the office at around August 2013.