A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant committed a crime resulting from the voluntary use of subsidies is a person who operates a mutual company with the purpose of building business in Gyeong-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun.

On March 10, 2015, the Defendant was selected as a business operator entrusted with house repair projects in kind, which was conducted by a recipient of a family in kind in the middle half-yearly period in the Sin Chang-gun on March 16, 2015, and was granted 85 million won (80% in the country, 10% in the Do, 10% in the military expenses) in the name of the Defendant’s bank account (Account Number: D) in the name of the Defendant from the Sin Chang-gun on March 16, 2015.

Afterwards, the Defendant used the subsidy as above to cover KRW 69,632,890 as the construction cost of the housing improvement project for the beneficiaries for the purpose specified in the above subsidy project, and used the remainder of KRW 15,367,110 for the personal living expenses of the Defendant, not for the purpose determined according to the housing improvement project.

Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled the above KRW 15,367,110, and used subsidies for other purposes.

2. If a local subsidy program operator intends to transfer, suspend, or discontinue a local subsidy program due to a change in circumstances, he/she shall obtain prior approval from the head of the local government.

Nevertheless, the Defendant was scheduled to perform house repair works without obtaining approval from the head of the Si/Gun, which is the competent administrative agency, while the Defendant was selected as an entrusted business entity for house repair works in kind in the first half of the year 2015, which was conducted by the Si/Gu, on March 10, 2015.

52 The construction for 33 households among 52 households was completed, and the rest of 17 households was arbitrarily interrupted.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to E and F;

1. A copy of the subsidy passbook (Agricultural Cooperatives, A) shall apply 1.