The defendant shall be innocent.

A. The Defendant, around February 2, 2004 to December 31, 2012, worked as the film business team leader of the E Co., Ltd. located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter “E”) and supplied products, such as films, to customers.

There are occupational duties that should not be supplied to the defendant at an appropriate price and at an unfair low price to the customer.

Nevertheless, around the end of 2007, the Defendant established G in the name of F, a spouse of the Defendant, and voluntarily lowered the supply price of the Defendant to G to deliver E products.

On January 18, 2008, the Defendant supplied 20 products of “AFG-MXG-005 MXM 14*14*14 (K2-05-001)” to 28,385 won a lower unit, supplied 20 products of “AFG-MXG-005 MXG 14*14(K2-05-01)” to G, thereby obtaining property benefits equivalent to KRW 495,560, and suffered property damage equivalent to the amount of money of the E.

In addition, the Defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 549,252,825 in total from around that time to December 28, 2012, as indicated in the attached list of crimes, and suffered property damage equivalent to the same amount in E.

Judgment

The prosecutor brought a public prosecution as above on the premise that the defendant, as the head of the business team in the film business division of E, supplied E products to the customer at a lower price than G at will due to the violation of the duty to deliver the products to the customer at a reasonable price.

Considering the following facts that can be recognized by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, there is doubt that the defendant's arbitrary lowering the supply price as shown in the above facts charged so that he/she may not allow the supply of E products to G.

① The Defendant, around the end of 2007, actually operates G established in the name of F, his spouse, and did not notify it to E, and then E products, such as films, etc., from around that time to December 28, 2012.