logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2014.11.18 2014고단654
사기등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From December 18, 2006, the Defendant is a person who operates the “E Child Care Center” located in D in netcheon-si until then.

No person shall receive a subsidy or receive a subsidy for expenses incurred in infant care by fraud or other improper means.

1. On September 2009, the Defendant received basic childcare fees due to the registration of false employees (Fraud and violation of the Infant Care Act) with the knowledge that, when operating the above childcare center on the first day of September 2009, the Defendant could receive 350,000 won for each child if the three children are 0 years of age per teacher, and that, despite the absence of the fact that the F was actually working in the above childcare center, the Defendant received basic childcare fees for each child by deceiving a public official in charge of the victim netcheon-si, as if the F was a 0-year child G, H, and I, and instead, by deceiving a public official in charge of the victim’s childcare care.

Accordingly, the Defendant, around the 11th day of the same month, constituted F as a child care teacher in the above child care center, and three persons, including 0-year-old children G, etc., from the above day to March 12, 2010, received KRW 7,350,000 as a total of seven basic infant care fees in the same way as indicated in the attached list of crimes (1) from the above day to March 12, 2010, by applying for a basic infant care fee for the above three children and receiving KRW 1,050,000 as a basic infant care fee for the above three children.

2. On January 2010, the Defendant received basic childcare fees, etc. due to false registration of a child (Fraud and violation of the Infant Care Act) by deceiving a public official in charge of the victim netcheon City in charge of the care of the said child, even though the Defendant was not in charge of the care of H, who is a 0-year-old child, even though he was not in charge of the care of the said child.

arrow