The sentence against the accused shall be determined by a fine of KRW 40 million.

The defendant shall be ordered to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant and B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) are business operators prescribed in the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act that run each construction business, and the Defendant’s employees C, upon participating in the bid for D construction work ordered by the Public Procurement Service in the amount of KRW 77,200,000,000,000 on April 28, 2009, contact B’s regular business E and asked B to “A to participate in D D construction work being promoted”, and E consented thereto.

Then, after completing the internal report on the result of the above agreement, the above E, F, G, etc., who are employees of B from July 24, 2009 to July 24, 2009, the date of the bidding, and the design quality and the bid price of B, and B, while participating in the bidding of the above construction, submitted a design prepared to obtain a design score lower than the Defendant, and submitted a bid to obtain a design score at KRW 73,25,000, near the Defendant’s bid price at KRW 72,50,500,000, which is close to the Defendant’s bid price at KRW 72,50,00.

Accordingly, the employee C of the defendant committed an unfair collaborative act to determine the successful bidder in the bidding through an agreement with other business operators in connection with the defendant's business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the defendant's agent;

1. Entry of H (including the part in which I's statement is stated) and C in a copy of each prosecutor's statement made by the prosecution;

1. A copy of the document confirming the preparation of E (a statement of investigation records 865 pages);

1. A copy of the written statement prepared C (a copy of investigation records 867 pages);

1. A description of a copy of the D construction works (Public Procurement Service);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes entered in a copy of an electronic contract (83 pages of investigation records);

1. Articles 70, 66 (1) 9, and 19 (1) 8 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;