logo
logo
Sign in

"Insurers Play Tennis?" Business Expense Ineligible Operations Life Insurer Sanctions

avatar
sportstotomen com

‘임원 취미에 26억?’…돈 더 퍼붓고 테니스장 인수한 동양생명 진짜 이유가? - 매일경제

Company Claims "Healthcare Services" but Doesn't Qualify for Operating Rights

Bidding on behalf of another company and then paying reimbursed travel expenses without proof.


Tennis court


The Financial Supervisory Service announced on the 24th that it has decided to take action against A Life Insurance Company, which unilaterally obtained the right to operate a tennis court under unfavorable conditions and condoned the improper use of expenses by its executives, in accordance with relevant inspection and sanction regulations.


In addition, the company will conduct an internal examination on the damages caused to the company by the executives in this process and notify investigative agencies if necessary.


According to an on-site inspection of business expenses last month by the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS), the company has been acting as the de facto operator of the Jangchung Tennis Center, a shared property owned by the city, since October last year.


Company A explained that it operated the tennis court as part of its healthcare services utilizing tennis.


On the other hand, some people associate the acquisition of the management rights with the head of Company A, who is known to be a tennis enthusiast.


Initially, the tender announcement for the selection of the operator of the Jangchung Tennis Center stated that only those with a track record of operating a tennis center within the last five years could bid. In addition, the winning bidder was prohibited from "subleasing part or all of the operating rights to a third party.


However, when A Life Insurance Company failed to meet the requirements for operator qualification, it put forward Company B to win the bid instead of bidding directly, and then effectively compensated B for the bid amount by paying advertising expenses.


The previous bid for the right to operate the Jangchung Tennis Center was only 370 million won, but Company B won the bid for 2.66 billion won.


Company A agreed to compensate Company B 2.7 billion won for three years in the name of basic advertising expenses, and also paid 160 million won in labor and management expenses in the name of advertising agency fees.


The KFTC explained that while general employees of Company A used the Jangchung Tennis Center through advance reservations and settled expenses afterward, some executives used it freely without any procedures or payment.


In addition, Company A paid for expenses such as overseas business trips for executives without reviewing documents that could prove business relevance or supporting materials such as expense reports.


The company also pointed out that it operated business expenses unreasonably, such as increasing business promotion expenses without any basis.


In response, Company A explained, "The tennis court contract currently under investigation by the KFTC is part of a company-wide multifaceted effort to develop a sustainable business model and strengthen its brand image and customer loyalty." "In particular, it was aimed at acquiring new customers, marketing, and social contribution effects through healthcare services called sports."


"We apologize to our customers, shareholders, and employees for the announcement of these findings despite our sincere explanations during the inspection. We will continue to cooperate with the investigation and defend our position to the best of our ability until a final decision is made." 스포츠토토맨

collect
0
avatar
sportstotomen com
guide
Zupyak is the world’s largest content marketing community, with over 400 000 members and 3 million articles. Explore and get your content discovered.
Read more