A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

The request of the applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Punishment of the crime

On May 28, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Subsidy Management Act at the Suwon Friwon method and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten months on July 29, 2014 and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 29, 2014.

The Defendant, from June 2010 to February 2013, 2013, worked as the Vice-President in D, an independent co-operation chain, a rice farming business entity, as an independent vice-president (hereinafter “D”), and around December 201, the Defendant would offer to E the exclusive sales right of agricultural materials in D (the right to exclusively sell agricultural materials to D members) from around December 201 to E (the right to exclusively sell agricultural materials).

By establishing a corporation, the Defendant donated the donation to the above D, based on the exclusive right to sell agricultural materials, and the Defendant made a defect in the agricultural materials distribution business as well as the Defendant. On February 2012, E acquired a corporation and changed its trade name to F (F) (hereinafter “F”) and added agricultural materials distribution and wholesale distribution for business purposes, and then granted KRW 70 million to the Defendant around April 2012, and the Defendant delivered the amount of KRW 40 million among them to D.

The Defendant, during July 2012, 2012, entered into a contract with the victim C, who is an employee of F, in that of coffee located in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, under which F, made an investment of KRW 100 million in D, that F, in D, would provide F, to its members with an exclusive supply of agricultural materials, such as pesticides, fertilizers, and soil, at a lower price than agricultural cooperatives.

F Representative E did not make an investment exceeding KRW 70 million, and if it borrowed KRW 30 million, it would make a full payment by the end of December 2012.

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any property, even if he received money from the injured party, it was thought that he would be used for other personal purposes, and there was no guarantee that he could obtain approval from the D Council for giving F the exclusive right to sell agricultural materials.

Therefore, the defendant has the intention or ability to allow FF to operate a business selling agricultural materials with the exclusive right to sell agricultural materials from D.