The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the defendant made a confession of all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake, and that it is the first offender who has no record of crime, is favorable.

However, in this case, it is recognized that the defendant is exempted from the repayment of the above subsidy obtained through the closure of the company of this case, but the court below seems to have judged in consideration of the unfavorable circumstances such as the defendant's age, sex, occupation and environment, motive and background leading to the crime of this case, motive and circumstance leading to the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, it is not recognized that the defendant's punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion is not reasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, provided that Article 40 of the Subsidy Management Act (amended by Act No. 12844, Nov. 19, 2014) is deemed to be "Article 40 of the previous Subsidy Management Act (amended by Act No. 12844, Nov. 19, 201)."