Defendants shall be punished by each fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The Defendants did not pay the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

1. From January 7, 2013, the Defendant served as the head of the urban development team, who is a public official of Grade VI, with the traffic of the F viewing City from around January 7, 2013, and performed the work of “G construction” (total project cost of KRW 2,984,00,000,000, project period from May 7, 2012 to July 6, 2013) and “H construction” (total project cost of KRW 3,300,000,000, total project cost of KRW 3,300,000,000, project period of KRW from February 19, 2013 to October 16, 2013).

On April 2012, the Defendant was awarded a contract for construction costs of KRW 910,075,00 with respect to “G Corporation,” which is a contractor, according to this limited competition bid method, and was aware of the fact that in October 2012, the Defendant was entering into a contract for the construction of landscaping facilities and the part of landscaping planting construction among the Linc Co., Ltd., and the construction is being carried out by the Kinc Co., Ltd. (representative L).

Nevertheless, the Defendant received a request from N in the construction of F viewing and construction with a workplace-based cable, and from N in the construction division, “the intention to become a subordinate company within the B,” among the F Viewing and offices located in M on March 2013, the Defendant: (a) at the office of the F Viewing Urban Development Team, “O, the head of the F Viewing and Urban Development Team, reported the pine trees in B; (b) at the end of March 2013, in the office of the F Viewing and Urban Development Team, “I reported the pine trees in the Gu; (c) the subcontract is given to B; and (d) the O thought that it would no longer be able to perform construction works in the future as it is possible for the Corporation to suffer any disadvantage in construction works and contracts with Defendant B without a registration certificate.

As a result, the Defendant abused official authority as a public official belonging to the F-Viewer of “G Corporation,” and obstructed the exercise of rights by having O, a field manager of the KOI perform an act that does not have any obligation as above.

2. Defendants B and C are the defendants B.