Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.

1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that Defendant A is the representative director of Defendant B, and Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is a corporation with the purpose of household wholesale, retail, trade, and military supply.

Although a trader or dealer of goods, etc. is prohibited from doing any act impairing or changing the indication of origin, Defendant A, from around April 2010 to around March 2011, imported furniture from Vietnam and supplied it to the U.S. military unit, with an intention to raise an issue of origin, to remove the country of origin indicated at the time of importation, and deliver it after removing the country of origin from the place of origin indicated at the time of importation, and 562 points for households, such as books, chairss, and so on from Vietnam [1................] 562 points for 82,477 U.S. dollars (limited to USD 89,339,086) for the above 70 U.S. dollars in total (hereinafter referred to as “instant imported goods”) for the purpose of selling the goods to be supplied to the U.S. military unit, and the company indicated the above 167 U.S. dollars in the sale price of the goods to be supplied to P.M. 1614, including the above domestic military unit.

2. Determination:

(a) Provisions and interpretation of laws and regulations (1) Article 33(1) of the Foreign Trade Act (hereinafter referred to as “goods subject to origin labeling”) that the Minister of Knowledge Economy announces to be subject to origin labeling for the establishment of fair trade order and the protection of producers and consumers.