Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant B worked for the Korea Housing Corporation from February 1, 1990 to January 6, 2012. From February 11, 2008 to September 30, 2009, Defendant B was engaged in the sales, consultation, and conclusion of contracts of commercial sites, quasi-residential sites, etc. while Defendant B serving as the vice head of the Korea Housing Corporation's G Team for the Housing Corporation from February 11, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Defendant A was the representative of “H” for the purpose of housing construction and sale from March 24, 2008 to August 12, 2008, and the Defendants came to know that Defendant A entered into a contract with one another by entering into force that Defendant B purchases the I Commercial Location, which is the jurisdiction of Defendant B.

Defendant

B On September 208, 2008, at the F Office of the Business Headquarters of the Housing Corporation located in K, the victim E expressed his intent to purchase the I Commercial L B B block (hereinafter “the instant land”) in order to carry on the sales business after the construction of officetels, and notified the contact information of the Defendant, stating that “the victim’s contact information was entered into a contract before the land was cut off, but the purchase of the IP is the same.”

Defendant

At the same day, A agreed to the agreement with the Housing Corporation on the land of this case and agreed to pay KRW 150 million to the Defendant A, by presenting “A’s proposed contract” to the victim’s provisional contract on the land in the vicinity of the Incheon-dong Incheon-dong bus terminal located in South-gu, Seoul-dong, the same day, stating that “A will be able to conclude this contract with the Housing Corporation on the land of this case if the victim would be 150 million Won.”

The Defendants at the F Business Headquarters Office of the Korea Housing Corporation around September 12, 2008, and Defendant A again presented to the victim the aforementioned “pre-determined contract”, and Defendant B stated that the victim demanding reproduction of the aforementioned “pre-determined contract” shall not be able to do so because it is not likely that it would not interfere with the outside,” and that it would be done by means of a written confirmation of deposit at home. The pre-determined contract amount of this case is 200 million won.