Seowon Nonsan City Council Member Raises Suspicions of Preferential Treatment for Horticultural Specialty Localized Project Companies

Company A Awarded 1.36 Billion Won Supply Contract by Private Negotiation
Rep. Seo Says "Unusually Drafted by Team Leader... Chungnam Province Also Raised Concerns"
Nonsan City States "Project to Be Conducted as Public Contest to Benefit More Farmers"

Seowon, Nonsan City Council Member

Nonsan City in South Chungcheong Province is facing allegations of preferential treatment after awarding a private contract worth 1.36 billion KRW to a single company for this year's horticultural specialty regional customized project.

The city allocated 1.36 billion KRW, including provincial funds from South Chungcheong, in the main budget for this project to support local farms in preventing continuous cropping damage and promoting crop growth, and also included an additional 630 million KRW in the supplementary budget. It has been confirmed that this project is supported by a South Chungcheong Provincial Council member.

Company A reportedly signed a private contract with the city for the supply of goods worth 1.36 billion KRW and delivered nutritional supplements to local agricultural cooperatives and nine agricultural organizations, sparking controversy.

In relation to this, an employee in charge of the relevant department raised concerns about the project being carried out with a single company and a specific crop, refused to draft the project proposal, and it is reported that the department head at the time even consulted with the audit office for a prior review.

Furthermore, the department head, concerned about possible disputes over the project process, obtained confirmation letters for project implementation from local South Chungcheong Provincial Council members, and it is said that the team leader drafted the proposal and signed the private contract with Company A.

This has led to suspicions of rebates involving the company.

These facts were revealed during the administrative audit of the Rural Vitality Division at the Nonsan City Council on the 26th.

Assembly member Seo Won (Democratic Party) questioned the head of the Rural Vitality Division, asking, "Why was the 630 million KRW reflected in the supplementary budget for the horticultural specialty regional customized project not implemented as originally planned and instead changed to a public offering project?"

He continued, "Who proposed this project? It is highly unusual for the team leader to draft the proposal instead of the working-level staff," and added, "I understand that even South Chungcheong Province recognized the problems with the project and intervened."

He also said, "I heard from acquaintances that Company A was told by the province to just apply since the budget had already been secured, and it is possible that the 630 million KRW in the supplementary budget could have also gone to this company," questioning, "Is this a subsidy project for the benefit of a particular business? Who is this project really for?"

He further pointed out, "According to social norms, everyone thinks there is a rebate involved," and "If a specific individual is designated in advance as a subsidy recipient and receives support, it violates Article 32 of the Local Finance Act."

Seo emphasized, "This project is an ongoing project meant to support farmers and should be provided to as many farmers as possible, but due to budget constraints, that has not been possible," adding, "This has left the farmers feeling truly let down."

He added, "Politicians cannot take responsibility for public officials. Politicians serve four-year terms," and urged, "Public officials should not be swayed by politicians and should work according to their convictions."

In response, a city official stated, "We will carry out the project as a public offering in accordance with laws and procedures so that many farms can benefit."

Meanwhile, in a joint government audit of South Chungcheong Province in 2017, the province received an institutional warning regarding the 'budget allocation and execution of the high-quality horticultural crop demonstration project,' and a special audit was conducted, resulting in disciplinary action and investigation requests for those involved based on the findings.