Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 5,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The Defendants respectively.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A uses the position of Chinese EF Limited Construction Co., Ltd., and brokers domestic clothing companies and trade transactions, and Defendant B is the representative director of H, a corporation with Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G from July 10, 2006 to October 23, 2013, and a corporation manufacturing and selling light products in the second floor.

From May 24, 2010 to North Korea, the Defendants were unable to bring in the clothing from North Korea as a result of the Government’s ban on the import and export of all the goods into North Korea, and the Defendants conspired to import the clothing manufactured in North Korea with the country of origin indicated in China as a medium country and agreed to import the clothing as of April 22, 2013, and indicated the country of origin as a medium country by importing gender pocket 656km produced in North Korea from the F Limited Corporation in China from North Korea on April 22, 2013, and by falsely indicating the country of origin as of May 8, 2013, including the false indication of origin by importing the clothing 81,218,297 won as shown in the attached list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement made to I and J;

1. Application of a copy of the investigation report (as a result of analyzing the contents of H e-mail);

1. Article 53-2 Subparag. 1 and Article 33(4)1 of the Foreign Trade Act (Amended by Act No. 11958, Jul. 30, 2013); Article 30 of the Criminal Act; selection of fines for negligence;

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: (a) the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act are against each other; (b) there are no criminal records of the same kind; (c) circumstances to be considered in the course of the crime; (d) the volume of transaction; and (e) the amount of profit from the crime appears not to be large; and (e) Defendant B appears to have been involved in the crime manually.