Defendant

A Imprisonment of one year and fine of 3,200,000 won, Defendant B’s imprisonment of two years and six months and fine of 8,900,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A’s status as the Defendants is the representative director and the head of the public water services headquarters of Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) from January 2013 to the date, and Defendant B has overall control over the said company’s business. From January 2004 to January 201, Defendant B was working at C Parts Business Team (to be promoted to the head of the team on January 201) and was in charge of the business related to the import and sale of engine parts. Defendant C is a corporation with the aim of domestic agents and engine sales maintenance business of the German engine chain.

2. In relation to the structure of the crime and the solicitation of the resolution for the crime, C has been awarded a successive subcontract from the Defense Business Administration to the station for the maintenance of the K and L with the engine installed through the K and L, and the Korea Coast Guard (the present Korea Coast Safety Headquarters) also from the Korea Coast Guard (the Korea Coast Guard) to the station for the maintenance of the guard ship, such as M with the engine installed by H companies, and has replaced the existing parts with the engine parts imported from H companies as part of the maintenance station as part of the above maintenance station.

The maintenance cost is settled based on cost data, such as an import report on parts used for maintenance, and the cost settlement is paid by the Defense Business Administration and the Korea Coast Guard. Defendant B committed a crime such as forgery of private documents, false import declaration, fraud, etc., with intent to unfash the import cost of engine parts used for each maintenance station.

On March 2013, immediately after Defendant A was appointed as the head of C C C C’s Public Water Business Headquarters, Defendant A confirmed that the cost of the engine components was unfilled, but on May 2013, 2013, Defendant A instructed the staff in charge of Defendant B, etc., including Defendant B, to receive the price of supply through a cost manipulation by continuing to “the 2013-year contract volume, which has already been imported as part, shall proceed with the import declaration and settlement procedures as in the existing method, and shall be normalized from new contract volume in 2014,” and by accepting it, Defendant B’s false import declaration and fraud.