A. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement)

B. Acceptance of bribe

(c) Offering of bribe;

1.(a) A

2.b. B

(c) C. C. C. C. C.

Cho Jong-won (prosecutions) and the highest police officer (public trial)

Law Firm U&A (For the defendant)

Attorney Kim Dong-chul

March 13, 2015

Defendant A and C, each of whom shall be punished by imprisonment of one year and six months, and imprisonment of one year and a fine of thirty million won.

When Defendant B does not pay the above fine, the above defendant shall be confined in the old house for the period calculated by converting 100,000 won into one day.

However, the above punishment against Defendant A and C for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, and the execution of the above imprisonment against Defendant B shall be suspended.

The amount of KRW 13,342,66 shall be collected from Defendant B. The amount equivalent to the above fine and the additional collection charge shall be ordered against Defendant B.

Criminal History [Status of the Defendant]

Defendant B is a director of a stock company A (hereinafter referred to as "A") designated by the Director of the National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service as the "Certification Institute for Environment-Friendly Agricultural Products", who actually operates the above company, and Defendant A and C are co-representatives of P Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as "P") established for the purpose of material inspection and test.

【Criminal Facts】

1. The co-principal of the defendant A and the defendant A;

The Defendants, as the joint representative director, deducted the corporate funds from the method of paying the business fees for the business activities requested for sample analysis to the false business operators and other income persons while in charge of managing the corporate funds, and received them from each other and conspired to use them for personal purposes such as living expenses.

On September 30, 2010, the Defendants sent KRW 33,200,00 from the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Account Number: omitted) in the name of P*, which was the operator of ‘***'* in the P office in the Daejeon P office**, even though there was no fact that the business was conducted for sample analysis request for P *** as if the business was paid in return for the business activity of consulting **** from the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Account Number: omitted) in the name of P* to the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Omission), and received the return, and used it for personal use, such as living expenses, of the Defendants.

From that time until January 24, 2014, Defendants: (a) transferred total of KRW 1,446,915,610 via 24 times in the same manner as indicated in the attached list of crimes; (b) and (c) received the money back to the account in the name*, and used the money back to the Defendants for personal purposes, such as living expenses. Accordingly, the Defendants conspired and embezzled P’s funds during the course of performing their duties.

2. When Defendant B’s certification examiners request for the verification of samples, such as soil, etc. from the land cultivated by the farm household applying for certification of environment-friendly agricultural products, P is expected to collect samples from the farm household in return for analyzing the samples and receiving an analysis cost from the result of the analysis. As a result, as much request for sample analysis is received, P gains a large amount of profit.

The Defendant, an officer or employee of a certification body deemed a public official pursuant to the former Environment-Friendly Agriculture Fosterage Act (amended by Act No. 11459, Jun. 1, 2012; Act on the Fostering of Environment-Friendly Agriculture and Fisheries and the Management and Support for Organic Food, Etc.; and enforced on June 2, 2013), who requested certification analysis during the period of time, and received 13,342,66 won from the agricultural bank account in the name of father of the Defendant for the reward for the request for analysis on February 15, 2013. Accordingly, the Defendant accepted a bribe in relation to public official’s duties.

3. Defendant C. C.

As in paragraph (2), the defendant provided a bribe in connection with his duties to B who is deemed a public official as a honorarium for the request for analysis.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A copy of the police suspect examination protocol against Kim*

1. Voluntary statement of each police station*

1. The omission;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

○ Defendant A: Article 3(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes; Articles 356, 355(1), and 30 (General Control) of the Criminal Act

○ Defendant B: Article 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the choice of imprisonment and fines shall be imposed concurrently pursuant to Article 2(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes)

Article 3(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Articles 356, 355(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act (including the embezzlement and the embezzlement), Articles 133(1), and 129(1) of the Criminal Act (the offering of bribe and the selection of imprisonment)

2. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

C. C.: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [the punishment shall be imposed to the extent that the punishment is more severe and concurrent crimes with the punishment prescribed in the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement)]

3. Discretionary mitigation;

Defendant A and C: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Code

4. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendant B: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

5. Suspension of execution;

Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Code

6. Additional collection:

Defendant B: the latter part of Article 134 of the Criminal Act

7. Order of provisional payment;

Defendant B: Reasons for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendant A

(a) Application of the sentencing criteria;

【Scope of Recommendation】

Type 3 (not less than KRW 500,000 but less than KRW 5 billion) Special mitigation Area (from September to three years)

[Special Mitigation] substantial one company or family company, penalty not being imposed, or substantial damage has been recovered.

(b) Determination of sentence;

The sentencing conditions prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's confession of the crime, the defendant has no record of crime other than fines, the P has returned the amount of embezzlement to P, the defendant has returned the amount of embezzlement to P, the age, environment, circumstances of the crime of this case, details, circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as follows.

2. Defendant B

(a) Application of the sentencing criteria;

[Scope of Recommendation] Type 2 (at least one million won but less than three million won) Basic Area (at least one year to three years) of Acceptance of Bribe (at least one million won): None of the following:

(b) Determination of sentence;

The sentencing conditions prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the confession of a crime, the fact that the defendant is against the law, the fact that the defendant is deemed a public official under the law, the fact that there is no criminal record other than the fine, the age, environment of the defendant, the circumstances of the crime of this case, the details and circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be

3. Defendant C. C.

(a) Application of the sentencing criteria;

1) First crime [Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement)]

【Scope of Recommendation】

Type 3 (not less than KRW 500,000 or less than KRW 5 billion) Special mitigation (9~3 years)

[Special Mitigation] substantial one company or family company, penalty not being imposed, or substantial damage has been recovered.

2) Class 2 crime (Bribery)

[Extent of Recommendation] Class 1 (less than 3 million won) basic area (not more than April - October) of the offering of a bribe

[Special Convictd Persons]: None

3) The scope of final sentence due to the aggravation of multiple offenses: from September to May 3.

(b) Determination of sentence;

The sentencing conditions prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's confession, the defendant has no criminal record, the P has been practically holding C, the defendant returned the amount of embezzlement to P, the defendant's age, environment, circumstances of the crime of this case, details and circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered by the sentence in consideration of the sentencing conditions prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

The presiding judge, judge and assistant superintendent;

Judges Lee Jae-soo

Judges Kim Jae-hwan