beta
Text
Defendant
A A Fine of 10,00,000 won, Defendant B of 2,000,000 won by fine, Defendant C of 7,000,000 won by fine.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
With respect to the business of selecting persons from Ansan-si in respect of the livestock facility modernization project in 2012 implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, 20% of their own charges and 80% of their loan subsidies (one percent per annum, seven years with three years grace period):
1. Defendant A:
A. On September 27, 2012, without paying KRW 120,00,000 to the persons related to the livestock shed facility modernization project within E located in Ansan-dong-dong-si, an “goods supply contract” prepared in a false manner by presenting to the public official in charge of the assistance in the Ansan-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si
B. Although the Plaintiff did not pay KRW 20,000,000, which was incurred in relation to livestock pens facility modernization projects within E located in Ansan-si, Sindong-si, on December 31, 2013, the Plaintiff received KRW 42,542,500 on December 26, 2013 from the witness for the company that performed the same construction and received money from the witness G account again to the erroneous amount, despite the fact that the Plaintiff received money from the witness G account for the erroneous amount of the said money, and then acquired the money under the condition of repayment for 80,00,000,000,000 as a loan with the consent of the public official of Ansan-dong, which was believed to be true, under the condition of repayment for 1% a year of 3% a year and 7 years a year of 26, 2013.
2. Defendant B’s above-mentioned defendant A.
In order to induce the act of subsection A to perform the act of subsection (a), a subsidy of KRW 600,00,000 on October 5, 2012 is deemed to have been executed on the goods supply contract provided to A, even though it was received from the same person as the construction cost of facilities for modernization of money, and immediately transferred the money to Defendant A using a financial account under the name of a third party, even though it was ordered to transfer the money to Defendant A.