Defendants are not guilty.

Ⅰ. On March 21, 2012, Defendant A’s summary of the facts charged [criminal record] was sentenced to imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months and additional collection of 89 million won for a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act in Gyeyang Branch of the Suwon District Court on March 21, 2012, and the appeal was all dismissed, and the judgment was finalized on September 27, 2012.

Defendant

B On August 31, 2007, the Seoul High Court sentenced 1 year of imprisonment and additional collection of 3.5 billion won for violating the Attorney-at-Law Act at the Seoul High Court on January 17, 2008, and the above sentence became final and conclusive on January 17, 2008, and completed the execution of the sentence in the Seoul Detention Center on January 28,

【Criminal Facts】

The victim F (the 40 years of age) came to be withdrawn for the reason of the violation of corporate ethics, etc. while operating the KG, which is a partner company of the KGTA, in the macro-si, and became aware of the defendants while finding an opportunity to work as a partner company of the above company.

1. On July 2010, Defendant A talked about the victim at the H hotel coffee shop located in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, about July 2010, Defendant A expressed that “A has a large number of people who want to be in the relationship and legal profession, and is friendly with the Minister of Labor, and is well known to the Minister of Labor, and is well known to the Vice Minister of Knowledge Economy. The sixth degree of punishment B has re-power, and the prosecutor or National Assembly member, the Vice Minister of Knowledge Economy, and the president of the treatment Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, etc. are well known and well known.”

In addition, around July 13, 2010, the defendants could exercise influence in the JAB office operated by the defendant B, which is on the first floor of the Yongsan-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City I building, because there are many people who know about the victims in the JAB office and again in the fixed-term relationship, and they discussed that the amount of KRW 200 million is changed in terms of business promotion expenses.

However, the defendants did not have the ability to let the victim's company work as a cooperative company in the treatment-based maritime disputes resolution committee, as they talked with the victim.

The Defendants, at the above end, have 36,000,000 won via the K account in the name of the victim on July 13, 2010.