Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years, for one year of imprisonment for Defendant B, for Defendant C with prison labor for ten months, for Defendant D with prison labor for one year.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A was in office as the representative director of the R&A from February 5, 2009 to April 5, 2010, and Defendant B was in office as the representative director of the R&A (Grade IV) and Defendant B was in charge of personnel affairs in the Human Resources Management Team (the title was changed to the Human Resources Development Team) from the beginning of the year 201 to October 17, 2013, when Defendant B entered the R(R) as class 6 members on January 6, 2007, and the Non-General Team was issued on October 1, 2007, and was in charge of personnel affairs in the Human Resources Management Team (the title was changed to the Human Resources Development Team) by the beginning of the year 2011 to October 17, 2013.

On December 4, 2011, Defendant C has served as the new project development team leader (class III) through the strategic planning team leader and the strategic project team leader of the RRA.

On the other hand, Defendant D, as the vice president of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. (former Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd.) and the vice president of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., and Defendant E, as the head of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., was in charge of the expenses for the R&A, a franchise store.

2. As the representative director of the RBA, Defendant A, as a representative director of the RBA, was engaged in the affairs of overall management of the said company, such as the selection of a partner company, the progress of business, general affairs, personnel affairs, accounting, and fund management. Defendant B, as the representative director of the RBA, was engaged in the affairs of assisting A, and Defendant C, as the head of the strategic planning team of the RBA, was in charge of the affairs of planning, organization, and budget of the said company and the affairs of assisting A. In addition, Defendant C was engaged in the affairs of evaluating the project proposal selected by the RBA as an internal evaluation committee of the project proposal selection evaluation committee

Therefore, the above Defendants handle their duties fairly on the basis of objective evaluation of business performance capabilities, service quality, etc. of service companies in relation to the selection of service providers and the maintenance of service contract, and in this regard, the service companies.