Defendant

A All appeals filed against the Defendants by the Prosecutor and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (two years and six months of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution, and 320 hours of social service) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The Defendants related to AJ technology development projects, even though they did not have the intent or ability to actually carry out the AJ technology development project, prepared a false outline development plan, etc. with Defendant C’s proposal, submitted it to the Korea Content Promotion Agency, and submitted a false report, etc. as if they actually carried out the project, submitted a false report, etc. to which they were obtained a total of KRW 1,343,91,00 of the AJ technology development project from the Korea Content Promotion Agency.

B) Defendant A and B, related to AK production support project, conspired, but did not intend or have the ability to produce AK, etc., but pretended to carry out AK production support project in a normal way, and they were obtained from the Korea Content Promotion Agency a total of KRW 399,780,000 of indirect subsidies.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court against the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the Prosecutor’s argument of mistake of facts related to AJ technology development project (AJ technology determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts) The Defendants conspired with the main points of the AJ technology development project, and the facts were conducted by U.S. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “U”) and AI Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AI”) on the ground that they were not capable of performing the said AJ project due to lack of technology, equipment, research personnel, etc., ordered by the Korea Content Promotion Agency (hereinafter “AJ project”), and that they were involved in the development of technology in the project plan, etc.; Defendant A, B did not actually participate in the project; Defendant A, and B did not have the intent to bear self-charges paid for the said project; Defendant A, U.S. and AI’s personnel expenses not for the purpose of using the subsidy granted for the said project but for the first time;