Defendant

All appeals filed by the Defendants and prosecutor against the Defendants of A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) the lower court sentenced the Defendants to the following punishments:

Defendant

A, C, and E: Imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months, 2 years of suspended sentence, 6 months of suspended sentence, 2 years of suspended sentence, 2 years of imprisonment for Defendant B, D, F, H, J, L: Each fine of 10 million won: Defendant A, B, D, E, F, G, H, K, K, and L (other Defendants than Defendant M) whose respective fines of 5 million won are fine of 500,000 won are excessive, and the prosecutor asserts that the above punishment of the Defendants is excessive, and that the above punishment of all the Defendants is unfair.

The lower court determined on the grounds for appeal, taking into account the period, frequency, and scale of collusion by each of the Defendants, and sentencing conditions were comprehensively considered, taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendants did not repeat again while recognizing and reflecting all of their mistakes; (b) the Defendants seem to have been in an inevitable aspect to prevent infeasible competition while maintaining an adequate price within the estimated price of AG and AH, which is the maximum supply source of domestic AG and AH; (c) the Defendants did not have the same power to the Defendants; and (d) Defendant J and M were first offenders; (d) the Defendants’ status and position in the company; (e) the degree of their decision-making and responsibility; and (e) the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, occupation, family relationship; and the motive and consequence of the crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime.

Defendant

The other Defendants except M asserts that the following circumstances should be considered:

There is no choice but to coordinate the successful tender price in consideration of the situation of factory operation by supply company and the inventory of raw materials affected by international market prices, and it is essential for companies to estimate the supply price or the supply quantity.

The first priority method (the supply price shall be uniformly determined at the lowest width while being supplied by selecting two or four companies in the order of the lowest successful bid price) and the first priority method [in the case of sugar items, the total, metal, or so on.