1. The Defendant’s corrective order and penalty surcharge payment order issued against the Plaintiff as the Decision No. 2013-069, April 4, 2013.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s status as the Plaintiff and Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Hansung Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Hansung Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Simtraf Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Furden Social Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Ameri Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Ameri Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ameri Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Ltd., and the business offices of the Republic of Korea of Cambodia (hereinafter respectively referred to as “Masung,” “Koreanization,” “Manman,” “Manman,” “Manman Social,” “IN,” “A,” and “nine companies, including the Plaintiff, etc.,” jointly referred to as four companies, such as the Plaintiff, etc., by obtaining permission from the Financial Services Commission for life insurance business pursuant to Article 4 of the Insurance Business Act, constitute an “business entity” under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (hereinafter referred to as “Fair Trade Act”).

B. On April 4, 2013, the Defendant issued a corrective order and a penalty surcharge payment order (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that the following acts by the Plaintiff et al. constitute Article 19(1)1 of the Fair Trade Act.

① Around August 30, 2002, nine companies, including the Plaintiff, agreed to set the rate of 0.05% with respect to the variable pension insurance minimum death insurance coverage fee rate (hereinafter “GMDB fee rate”) and the rate of 0.5 to 0.6% with respect to the variable pension minimum pension coverage rate (hereinafter “GMAB fee rate”) respectively, and the Plaintiff set the rate of 0.5 to 0.6% from April 26, 2004 when the Plaintiff issued variable pension insurance products from April 12, 2010 to April 11, 2010.

2. On January 27, 2005, four companies, including the Plaintiff, etc., will be 1% per annum in comparison with the special account reserve.