The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant entered into a contract with E, who is the actual supplier of special activities to determine monthly special activities in English and sports as KRW 25,00 or KRW 35,00 per child age, based on the child’s age. The above amount constitutes an actual supply price, as it is reasonably determined in accordance with the market economy principle, and there is no legal or contractual obligation to notify his/her guardian of the fact that he/she received rewards after the special activity supplier, and there is no legal or contractual obligation to notify his/her guardian of the fact that he/she received rewards after the special activity supplier. Thus, there was a deception of fraud, or used unlawful methods as stipulated in Article 54(3)6 of the former Infant Care Act (amended by Act No. 11627, Jan. 23, 2013; hereinafter the same).

shall not be deemed to exist.

2) The guardian of the child home operated by the Defendant determined that the amount of special activity expenses would be appropriate compared with other child care centers, and the guardian's act did not engage in an act of disposal by mistake. Thus, there is a relation between the Defendant's act and the guardian's special activity expenses.

subsection (b) of this section.

3) The Defendant had no change in the amount of the special activity expenses that the Defendant received from the provider of special activities before receiving the money from the provider of special activities, and thereafter there was no change in the amount of the special activity expenses that the Defendant received from the guardians, and the education for special activities for the childcare children was conducted normally. Since the Defendant did not have any damage to the guardians due to the Defendant’s return of some of the special activity expenses, it cannot be

4) The guidelines for guidance on child care projects of the Health and Welfare Council set the amount received by the Mayor/Do Governor by specifying the special activity expenses as the necessary expenses of the child care center from 2012, and prior to that, the Defendant’s receipt of money as stated in the facts charged.