A A shall be punished by a fine of 1,000,000 won, and a fine of 5,00,000 won.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Defendant

B from July 8, 2014 to July 7, 2016, when serving as the president of the overall president of the victim company located in the sixth floor of the F building in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and engaged in the business of managing and supervising the overall business of the victim company. Defendant A served as the head of the victim company’s business climate team from July 17, 2014 to January 30, 2015, and was in charge of marketing such as publicity and advertisement of the victim company.

1. In order to select three promotional materials manufacturers, such as the victim company’s homepage, video, and broitius, Defendant B’s joint crime committed the duty to select the company as the one most beneficial to the company by comprehensively taking into account the tender participants’ estimated amount, production capacity, etc. as the vice president and the vice president of the board of directors held by the victim company and the vice president of the board of directors held by the victim company. Defendant A, as the examination committee members and the head of the department in charge of the tender participants as well as the head of the department in charge of the above plastic test, is designated as the company in the manner most beneficial to the company, taking into account the tender participants’ estimated amount, production capacity, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendants, at around 14:00 on August 20, 2014, selected four examiners, including the Defendants, as three promotional materials production service companies, from among four participating companies in the above promotional materials production process to select the above promotional materials production service companies, in violation of the above duties, even though four examiners including the Defendants were selected as three promotional materials production service companies, Defendant B, at the victim’s office around 17:00 on the same day, was called “I, having a relationship with Defendant B, and having participated in the above examination.” Accordingly, the Defendants, “I,” which was “I, having a relation with Defendant B, and having participated in the above examination, changed the part of the production of “I,” instead of the contents of the examination by telephone, to Defendant A.