beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Each sentence sentenced by the court below (2 years of suspended execution of six months of imprisonment, and 2 years of suspended execution of ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. Each of the above types sentenced by the court below by the prosecutor is too unhued and unfair.
2. As to the defendants and the prosecutor's unfair argument of sentencing, it is recognized that the defendants were actively involved in each of the crimes of this case at the request of the defendant B, and that there is no history of punishment heavier than each fine and there is no history of punishment for the same kind of crime. The money acquired from each of the crimes of this case was used for construction cost of G person Law reconstruction, and it appears that the defendant A used the money acquired from each of the crimes of this case for the construction cost of G person Law reconstruction, and that the amount of self-sufficiency would have been invested, and that the defendant A could not gain any particular profit.
However, crimes such as violation of the Subsidy Management Act are serious criminals that undermine the soundness of the subsidy project and cause the financial soundness of the State. Each of the crimes of this case committed by G with the total project cost of KRW 500 million, by reducing the total project cost of KRW 200 million to KRW 40 million and applying for the subsidy to avoid the result that the subsidy amount of KRW 340,000,000 is KRW 50,000,000, and if it is original, G was borne by G.
Along with the absence of the idea of actual burdening KRW 40 million, 40,000,00,000 which should be borne by the person who was reduced by the above method, deceiving the person who was 4,000,000 won by the method of submitting a brief statement as if he had to have to bear the above 4,00,000 won, and the nature of the crime is bad, and the amount of the subsidy is more than 1,50,000,000,000 won, which was received by fraudulent means, was not recovered from a large amount of damage, but did not reach an agreement with the victim, and Defendant B led to the crime.