The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.

The defendant does not pay a fine.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant was aware that he/she believed the horses of G and J, etc. and received a subsidy for extension of employment of the aged while applying for the normal subsidy, and thus there is no intention to acquire it by fraud.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts charged and misunderstanding the legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, found the following facts as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine, i.e., ① joined the National taxi industry trade union on May 4, 200, and the retirement age was 60 years from that time pursuant to the collective agreement stipulated in the above trade union, and thus, constitutes an ineligible company for the payment of subsidies for extension of employment of the aged. ② Defendant did not hear whether he/she directly applies for certain types of subsidies from G, J, etc., but the lower court’s seal was affixed on the application form for subsidies for extension of the retirement age of the aged. However, it appears that the lower court could have anticipated that he/she would apply for subsidies related to the extension of retirement age by granting each of the collective agreement set forth in 60 years of age and the rules of employment set forth in the collective agreement set forth in 55 years of age, ③ the F (State) had already been extended by at least 60 years of age according to the collective agreement around May 2000, which the employment regulations was modified in 205 years.