The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed.

Defendant

A and B shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of two years and six months.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

The sentence A, B, E, M, AE, AF (F) of the original judgment (the imprisonment of two years and six months, each of the imprisonment of two years and six months, Defendant E: the imprisonment of eight months, the suspended sentence of one year, Defendant M: imprisonment of four months, the suspended sentence of one year, Defendant AE: imprisonment of six months, the suspended sentence of one year, Defendant AF: imprisonment of one year, the suspended sentence of one year, and Defendant AF: 4 months, the suspended sentence of one year) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

The Defendants, as a co-principal, did not take part in the AZ project (hereinafter referred to as “A”) after hearing explanations at the project explanation held by the Defendant B, etc. (hereinafter referred to as “BA”), or after receiving introduction from the representatives of the same kind of enterprises, the Defendants were to participate in the AZ project (hereinafter referred to as “BA”) on the side of the project explanation held by the said BA (hereinafter referred to as “BA”), as the F, H, I, J, K, K, K, K, P, P, T, U, Z, AB, AD, AD, AH, AH, and AJ. In the absence of specific knowledge of the qualifications or requirements for participation in the AZ project at the time, the FWphone is used, and there is no fact that the BA used the AZ project to receive government subsidies.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (Defendant F, I, P, T, and AJ: 6 months of imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence, Defendant O, AB, AD, AG, and AH: Imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence, Defendant H, K, K, U, Z, and AA: 4 months of imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence, one year of suspended sentence, and three million won of fine) are too unreasonable.

Defendant

The judgment of the court below that there was a misunderstanding of the fact that Defendant AL had a criminal intent of conspiracy with BA and fraud since it had not conspiredd to obtain government subsidies using BA and AZ projects, and actually performed research and development or operation for the development of prototypes using BA equipment in 2012, and paid the cost of using the equipment by FW coophone.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (one million won of fine) by the court below is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Defendant

The crime of this case against A and B is committed when a small and medium enterprise uses research equipment of the main institution for research and development.