Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and for two years and six months, respectively.

Each of the facts charged in this case.

Punishment of the crime

1. All facts;

A. Defendant A, who served as the Chief of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration Director from November 1, 2007 to November 20, 2009, was discharged from Korea on December 31, 2009 to K of the Air Force on June 1, 2010 and served as the Chief of the N Headquarters in charge of the supply of M by February 19, 2014, and Defendant B, who was employed as L’s full-time employee from January 1, 2006 to May 31, 2012 as NN head of L defense Acquisition Program Department, and the Chief of the N Headquarters from June 1, 2012 to April 30, 2014.

B. On December 29, 201, L entered into a supply contract with the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, concluded a supply contract with the Administrator of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration on the purport that “The supply price shall be KRW 23,535,492,192 by October 30, 201” connected to the National Defense Electronic Procurement System and “M shall be supplied only by 23,535,492,192.”

The general terms and conditions of the above contract shall comply with the provisions for the delivery date, specification, inspection, etc., and the specifications of all the goods shall be a new product suitable for the purpose of purchase (Article 13). Under special terms and conditions of the contract, an inspection shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions prescribed by the Defense Agency for Technology and Quality Guarantee (hereinafter referred to as the “Quality and Quality Guarantee Agency”) which is the quality guarantee agency, and a subsequent production shall be commenced after producing one product and undergoing an inspection of the performance of the equipment source (Articles 7 and 14), and the application of the product shall conform to the specifications of the contract, and all the technical materials shall be the most fixed date at the time of the conclusion of the contract, and shall meet the specifications of the equipment and the business proposal.

(Articles 31 and 50) In addition, both sides set the detailed criteria for passing performance testing, such as temperature, pressure, output, durability, and the permissible range of electric system, as well as the size, weight, and form of the device through the “sashment” (Article 50) of the contract special terms and conditions, and the National Defense Quality Management Regulations.