1. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years and by a fine of one million won.

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the representative of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. established for the purpose of afforestation, forestation, deforestation, landscaping, etc., and is the actual operator of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., and the defendant B is the person in charge of accounting and bid-related affairs in the forest project of the above six corporations

1. Although Defendant A and Defendant B’s joint crime (contest interference) calls for an electronic bid in the name of another company in the event of a bid to participate in the bid, the Defendants shall not lend the name of another company or make a duplicate bid to the same public announcement. However, the Defendants established a corporation under the name of Defendant B and B’s parent and birth, employees, etc. with the aim of raising the successful bid rate due to an increase in the number of participating companies in the electronic bid, and thereby, intend to make a double bidding in the same bidding case. In addition to “A” as Defendant A’s representative, “AB” in the name of Defendant B, “AF” in the name of Defendant B, “AF” in the name of Defendant B, “ABB” in the name of MaJ, “ABB” in the name of MaJ, “ABBB”, “BB” and “DD” in the name of L, each of which is an employee.

On January 19, 2014, the Defendants participated in the “O project” electronic bidding in the “O project” office in M, which is in around 13:00, and was awarded the bid price in KRW 38,98,922 in the name of the “A”-based “A”-based “A”-based “A”-based “A”-based dispute resolution committee, which is in fact managed and managed by the Defendants.

In addition, from January 19, 2014 to June 22, 2017, the Defendants: (a) through 79 times in total as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table of crimes, and (b) through 4,708,835,032, awarded a contract for forest and afforestation work in the name of the same company that actually operates and manages the electronic bidding, and subsequently ordered the contract in N group and managed by the Public Procurement Service, thereby doing the electronic bid process of the “National Electronic Procurement System for Electronic Procurement”.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to commit fraud.