Defendant

A, B, and C are subject to each fine of KRW 1,50,000, Defendant D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, and M respectively. KRW 1,00,00,00.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A The president of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, Defendant B, the secretary general of the Q branch in the Democratic Nowon-gu Headquarters, Defendant C, the head of the P branch in the Q branch in the Democratic Nowon-gu, Defendant D, the head of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, Defendant R, the head of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, the head of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, Defendant E, the head of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, the head of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, Defendant F, the head of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, Defendant H, the head of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, the head of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, Defendant H, the representative of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, the auditor in the case of Defendant H, the head of the audit statistics of Defendant C, the head of the P branch in the laws and regulations of the P branch in the dispute resolution plan, and the

On June 7, 2013, in order to overcome the situation where the capital erosion deepens due to the illegal act of the P branch and the external economic crisis of the company, P intended to hold a temporary general meeting of shareholders to resolve capital reduction without compensation to reduce the 10 share of shares to 10 share, and the Defendants and the members of the P branch of the company in charge of the resolution of capital reduction agreed to oppose the resolution of capital reduction without compensation on the ground that the members of the union who hold shareholders are deemed to have suffered damage due to the capital reduction by the above capital reduction by dividing part of share certificates by delegation from the shareholders and exercise their voting rights by proxy.

At around 09:00 on June 7, 2013, with the number of 120 members of the board of directors in the dispute resolution, the Defendants rejected the position of the above general meeting of shareholders because P executives and employees of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the company in charge of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the company in charge of the company in charge of the resolution of the company in charge of the resolution.