Good day, everyone. Thank you all for joining this conference call. Now we will begin the fiscal year 2023 Q1 earnings call by Samsung Life Insurance. This conference will start with a short brief by Head of Finance and Accounting, followed by a Q&A session. If you have a question, please press star one, that is star and one on your phone during the Q&A. For cancellation, please press star two, that is star and two on your phone. Now we shall commence the conference by Samsung Life Insurance. Yes, good afternoon. Thank you for taking the time to join us at the 2023 Q1 earnings conference of Samsung Life. This is In Hwan Kim, Head of the Finance Team. In line with our prior notice, we will be focusing on a Q&A session with management for our Q1 call. Before proceeding, I will share the key highlights of our Q1 performance based on the materials that we have provided. We recorded our 1st quarterly results since adoption of IFRS 17, where we achieved notable outcomes thanks to the preemptive efforts toward enhancing the long-term value of our business ahead of implementation of the new scheme. In Q1, we recorded net profit above KRW 700 billion, following a significant reduction in our reserve interest expense on fixed rate reserves following transition to IFRS 17. Also, thanks to strong new business and improved investment yields. We also made significant progress in expansion into the asset management business, which we believe will be a key driver of growth for our company going forward. We acquired an equity interest in a French asset management company and took part in the Samsung FN REITs IPO as a majority shareholder. As of the end of March, our ending CSM, which represents the source of future insurance profits, stands at KRW 11.3 trillion, recording solid growth of KRW 0.6 trillion won from the end of the prior period. Driven by strong protection sales, Q1 new business CSM recorded KRW 846 billion won, and we expect continued increase in CSM from strong new business growth and efficiency gains in our in-force book, which will drive solid insurance service performance into the future. As of the end of March 2023, our K-ICS ratio is expected to improve to somewhere within the 210%-220% range, thanks to gains in Samsung Electronics share value and strong Q1 results. Based on our reinforced recurring earnings fundamentals and strong capital position under the new regulatory scheme, we are committed to maintaining our consistent stance of gradual expansion of our shareholder returns, which we explained at the start of this year. Under the new regulatory framework, we expect our differentiating strengths to become further solidified, and we will continue to work hard to improve our underlying competitiveness in our core insurance industry to lead broad growth across the industry as a leading player, while also doing our best to upgrade our corporate value by advancing our new business initiatives, including global asset management, healthcare, and digital. Please refer to the slides for further details on our performance. Also taking into mind that the projections on our conference call today may be subject to change depending on changes to both local and global economic conditions and business environment. Thank you. We'll now move on to our Q&A session with management. Now, Q&A session will begin. Please press star one, star and one if you have any questions. Questions will be taken according to the order you press star and number one. For cancellation, please press star two. That is star and two on your phone. The first question will be presented by Aditya Joshi from JP Morgan. Please go ahead with your question. Yeah, thank you so much for taking my question. I'm Aditya Joshi from JP Morgan. My question is actually related to the dividend payout ratio and the share buyback policy. When we look at the solvency ratio, it remains solid, around 210% or 220% level as of March 2023. When we look at the excess capital, which is above the 150% level of the required capital, is it reasonable to say that this excess capital is fully distributable to the shareholders? If so, is it reasonable to expect that the DPS hike will be in line or largely in line with the earnings increase in FY 2023? In addition, given this good amount of excess capital on the balance sheet, can we expect a share buyback program in this year or in the next year? Any guidance on this would be very helpful. Thank you. Yes, this is Sun Kim, the CFO. Let me take your questions. As you asked, actually the different forms of earnings, of course, the earning streams will go toward payout of dividends. Also we will determine the dividend payout commensurate to the increase we see in our earnings. But it is difficult for me to make more detailed comments at this point about what the DPS will look like at the end of this year, because this is in fact the first year we will be seeing official IFRS 17 base numbers being reported. There are some institutional issues that have not yet been resolved as well. So, on a full year basis, I think, there can be certain sources of some change or volatility. For example, there can be one-off in terms of certain investment assets that can impact our P&L also, our investment assets can also have an impact on our earnings as well. I think we'll have to watch for progression of our full year earnings to inform you in greater detail about the actual dividends. Regarding possibility of any share buybacks, of course, share buybacks will always be included in the set of available options that we could consider for our capital management purposes. For the time being, we remain committed to the principle of gradually improving our shareholder returns by first and foremost, increasing our cash dividends. Throughout the remainder of the year, we will observe our K-ICS and our earnings trends to make decisions at a later point about any possible share buyback. The next question will be presented by Byung-gon Lee from DB Financial Investment. Please go ahead with your question. Yeah. Yes, thank you for the detailed presentation. I'd like to ask two questions. First of all, the regulatory authorities have recently, commented about certain guidelines pertaining to, real loss indemnity type products, also zero surrender value type products, which have been cause for some concern in the market. I am assuming that, as a life insurance company, you will have applied different, assumptions versus the, P&C companies, and you have less exposure to, zero surrender value, policies. As far as the indemnity type policies go, I think perhaps your, assumptions, if anything, were more conservative than the, P&C players. If the assumptions are subject to certain change, there is a certain concern that it may affect your CSM. What is your current, position in terms of the, assumptions? If they do change, what is the expected impact to your CSM? The second question has to do with the difference between expected versus actuals. Actually, another insurance group in a recent conference call made certain comments that insurance companies have actually recorded a big improvement or increase in the difference between estimates and actuals because of conservative assumptions, and that the investors should pay attention to this as an important metric. This actually is not really consistent with our previous understanding toward the metric, the difference between expected versus actual. What is Samsung Life's position and how do you intend to manage this metric going forward? On a year-on-year basis, I think, in particular, there was a big negative shortfall, especially from the loading expense side. What was the cause for that? What is your outlook going forward? Yes, this is the head of the actuarial team. Let me answer your question. Yes. Regarding the regulatory authorities, comments regarding standardization of indemnity type products, also zero to low surrender value products. Also, just between the life and non-life companies, the products that have been provided to the market, also the timing and the loss rates on those products all vary. I understand that the application also will vary, and there will be a difference. 다만 현재 감독원 방안이 구체적으로 언급되지 않은 상황에서 당사의 영향을 말씀드리기는 좀 힘든 점은 좀 이해해 주셨으면 감사하겠습니다. For our indemnity type products, we actually determine our assumptions based on historical, past 3-5-year actual experience data, which is consistent with the LAT treatment that was applied in Korea. Since the FSS guidelines actually have not been crystallized yet, I think it is too early for us to comment about the possible impact. 다음으로 두 번째 질문에 대해서 답변을 드리겠습니다. 먼저 그 다른 그룹에서 그 플러스 예실차 규모가 크게 나오는 부분들이 보수적 가정을 적용한 부분에 대해서는 그 실질적으로 그 가정을 보수적으로 적용해서 나온 것인지, 이런 내용들에 대해서 그 세부적인 내용을 알 수 없기 때문에 제가 뭐라 이렇게 판단해서 말씀드리기가 좀 어렵습니다. Regarding the second question, you asked about another financial group which commented that it attributes the big increase in the difference from assumption and actual due to more conservative assumptions. Whether this is in fact true and if the upside did in fact come from conservative assumptions or not, we are not in a position to know the actual details, it would be quite hard for me to comment. 당사 1분기 예실차가 아마 배포된 자료에 KRW 833억으로 기재가 되어 있는데 이 부분에 대해서 좀 구체적으로 말씀을 드리도록 하겠습니다. You will find, in the presentation materials that for the Q1, we recorded, a difference of KRW 83.4 billion. 먼저 KRW 80 billion 중에서 KRW 20 billion 상당액은 보험금 예실차인데 이는 통상적으로 그 연말, 연초에 계절적 효과 때문에 저희가 그 1년을 전체적으로 봤었을 때 Q1하고 Q4에 좀 마이너스 예실차가 나고, Q2, Q3에 플러스 예실차가 난다고 이해해 주시면 될 것 같고, 참고로 작년 기준으로 보험금 예실차는 약 한 KRW 10 billion 정도 플러스 난 것으로 지금 그 나와 있습니다. Out of that total of KRW 80 billion or so, about KRW 20 billion is from the insurance claim. The difference from insurance claim estimates versus actuals. There's a bit of seasonality involved, which is typically in the Q1 or the Q4 of every year, we do tend to see minus, whereas in the second and Q3, it turns to a plus. For your information, compared to the same time last year, we did see actually an increase in the insurance claim, the difference amount by about KRW 10 billion. 사업비 예실차가 약 한 KRW 630억 정도 발생을 했는데, 이는 연초에 사내 근로복지적립, 다음에 교육세 납부액 확정, 다음에 1분기 업적 매출 성장에 따른 성과급 등 대부분 일회성 요인이고, 저희가 작년 말 세팅한 사업비 과정에서는 거의 예실차가 발생하지 않은 것으로 내부적으로 보고 있습니다. The remainder, KRW 63 billion or so is a difference in assumption versus actual from our loading expense. For the most part, this difference actually was attributable to one-off type items. Our contribution to the employee welfare fund, for example, or the fixed, the confirmation of our education tax liability amount, and also the payout of performance bonuses in line with the strong performance we saw in the Q1. If you look at the business plan of last year, we, our internal view is that we did not see, record any difference in assumption versus actual on any of those loading expense assumptions that were reflected in our business plan last year. 마지막으로 그 예실차 관리에 대한 당사의 방향은 기본적으로 IFRS 17 기준서에서 그 최적 가정이라는 정의와 맞게 그 예실차는 그 제로로 수렴하도록 관리하는 게 목표이지만, 사실 장래의 그 불확정, 불확실한 것을 제로로 맞춘다는 것은 불가능하다고 판단이 되고, 그 작년 같은 경우 당사의 예실차 변동폭이 전체 준비금의 한 1% 언더에서 움직였기 때문에 올해도 이러한 기조로 예실차가 최소화될 수 있도록 지속적으로 관리해 나갈 계획입니다. 이상입니다. In terms of how we intend to manage the difference, again, in assumption versus actual. We will stay consistent with the optimal assumption as defined within the IFRS 17 standard, under the goal of converging ultimately to 0. Given the ongoing uncertainties in the market, we think it would be quite impracticable to really expect it to be completely 0. If you look at last year, we did manage to keep it within 1% of total reserves. This year as well, we will focus on managing it at that very minimal stable level. 하나만 더. Team Leader Jiwon. One 개만 더 부연설명 드리겠습니다. 아까 인건비에 대한 예실차 증가분에 대해서 1분기 성과에 대한 어떤 성과급 지급이라고 했는데, 이건 아직 실현된 부분이 아니고요. 경영 계획 대비 지금 평가익으로 인한 지금 이 초과분에 대해서 저희가 1분기에 일단은 그 성과급 재원으로 해놓고, 이게 연간으로 가서 이제 경영계획 수렴하게 되면 이 부분들은 다시 또 조정되는 그런 항목입니다. 오해 없으시길 좀 부탁드리겠습니다. This is the head of the support team. I just wanted to make a comment, just to make sure that there's no misunderstanding. There was a mention that one of the one-off factors that resulted in the difference is attributable to the payout of performance bonuses as a labor cost item. Well, actually, this bonus amount actually has not been realized yet, but it has been year-marked upon assessment of the performance versus the business plan. Again, it is subject to adjustments across the full year. The next question will be presented by Jaewoong Won from HSBC. Please go ahead with your question. Yes. I would also like to congratulate you on the good results despite the challenging conditions. Same as Mr. Byung-gon Lee mentioned, I also am thankful for the company providing very detailed financial statements. I think it's quite helpful in informing us and helping us better understand. I also was quite curious about the difference between estimate and actuals. You did explain it in some part, but I wanted to ask further. You mentioned some kind of a seasonality that may impact the difference, and it may have a different pattern from one quarter to the other. What kind of difference do you expect across the four quarters of a year? I'd like to know more about that pattern. Second question, in terms of new business CSM, you have been quite consistent in achieving about KRW 3 trillion every year. Actually it's something that all the companies in the market are also focused on. If the situation evolves that there is margin competition, is there potential for your CSM margins to go down? What is your margin on the new business CSM at present? Going forward, do you think it will increase or go down? Could you break down the new business CSM by different types, death cover, health cover, et cetera? Yes, this is the head of the actual team. Let me take your first question regarding the difference between estimates and actuals. First of all, well, to share with you the conclusions first, it's actually quite difficult to reflect a seasonality in our fair value assumptions, because the correlation between seasonality and our overall efficiency actually has not been proven yet, which is why we do not look at the seasonality for the respective quarters, but make our assumptions on a full year basis. In terms of the variance from one quarter to the next, I think we will have to observe the pattern going forward. But just for information, in terms of what we observed last year, let me explain just to provide you with just a bit of color. In terms of our insurance premium, difference between estimate and actual, in the Q1 and Q4 last year, we actually saw the actual exceed the projected estimate, which is why we recorded negative difference between actual and estimate. Whereas in the Q2 and Q3, actually it was positive. In the Q2 and Q3 it was a positive of KRW 10 billion. 다음으로 second 질문 주신 신계약 CSM에 대해서 말씀을 드리면, 지금 이제 CSM 때문에 회사가 이제 경쟁이 격화된다고 말씀하셨는데 저희 같은 경우에는 어쨌든 시장의 어떤 상황과 그다음에 물량, 그다음에 당사가 이제 추구하는 수익성 이런 것들을 종합적으로 판단해서 신상품을 출시를 하고 있고요. 또 이제 기본적으로 사망, 건강, 금융의 포트폴리오 관리를 통해서 신계약 CSM의 최적화 앤드 극대화를 전략으로 가져가고 있습니다. Yes. Your second question regarding new business CSM, where you mentioned what kind of impact there could be amid intensifying competition over CSM. Well, actually, anytime we come up with a new product launch, we take into balanced consideration the market situation, market quantity and volume. Also the earnings target for our company to manage our overall product portfolio across death, health and financial categories under the principle of optimizing and maximizing new business CSM. 다음으로 그 사망, 건강, 금융에 대한 그 상품 포트폴리오별로 그냥 저희가 이제 기본적인 월초 베이스로 한 CSM 확보율을 그 말씀을 드리면 건강은 약 한 2,500%-2,600%, 사망은 약 1,400%-1,600%, 그다음에 금융은 280%-300% 정도로 지금 그 전망을 하고 있습니다. In terms of the mix across the different products, deaths, health and financial, just in terms of the first month monthly premium, for death, it's between 1,400%-1,600%. For health, 2,500%-2,600%. For financial, 280%-300%. 그 지난 그 2022년과 그 Q1 어떤 저희 신계약 CSM 추이를 바라보면 어떤 일부 뭐 수익성 하락을 한 상품도 있지만, 전체적인 물량이라든지 어떤 포트폴리오 상황에서 좀 현재까지는 좀 상승 추세에 있다라고 말씀드릴 수 있을 것 같고요. 마지막으로 뭐 우려하시는 게 결국엔 경쟁이 격화되면 마진율이 하락하는 거 아니냐라고 이제 고민할 말씀을 하신 것 같은데 어쨌든 당사는 신계약 CSM 목표 연간 한 KRW 3 trillion-KRW 3.3 trillion 달성을 위해서 상품을 운영할 거기 때문에 일부 상품군에서 경쟁이 격화되는 상품군에서 마진율이 하락하더라도 전체적인 총량 관점에서는 그 말씀드린 수준을 견지할 것으로 견지할 계획입니다. 이상입니다. A clarification from the translator. That percentage was first month monthly premium against CSM. The ratio between the two indicators. Sorry. In terms of the new business CSM, you asked potentially whether there can be a deterioration in the margin from more intense competition. It would depend on different products. For certain products, it could be that the margins may be going down. Overall, in terms of overall product volume and the overall product portfolio, we think that the margins have been maintaining overall upside. Going forward, if competition becomes more severe, could that weigh on our margins? Well, because we are managing our product and product portfolio, to be able to achieve our full year target of KRW 3 trillion-3.4 trillion in new business CSM every year, we think that even if for certain small pockets of products, even if margins may go down slightly overall on an aggregate basis, for all of our products, we will be able to defend and manage good, margin profile. 다음으로 질문해 주실 분은 골드만삭스 증권의 박신영 님입니다. The next question will be presented by Siny oung Park from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead with your question. 네, 안녕하세요. 저 질문에 앞서서 가능하다면 하나 요청드리고 싶은 게 있는데요. 아무래도 계절성에 대한 부분을 가늠하기에는 저희가 작년 Q1 숫자만 봐서는 조금 어려움이 있는 것 같아요. 그래서 가능하시다고 하면 2022년도에 분기별로 단순 손익계산서랑 뭐 CSM 무브먼트 제공해 주실 수 있으면 큰 도움이 될 것 같습니다. 그리고 질문으로 넘어가서 이번 분기에 말씀하신 대로 특이 요인이 꽤 있었던 것 같아요. 그래서 경상 수준의 분기 어닝이 다소 낮게 보는 게 맞는 것 같고요. 그래서 사측에서 보시는 경상 이익 수준의 규모가 어느 정도 되고, 이게 이걸 고려했을 때 연간 수준은 어느 정도를 전망하고 계신지 좀 궁금합니다? 그리고 작년 말 올해 초에 언급해 주셨던 35%-45% 수준의 배당 성향이 여전히 유효한 가이던스인지도 언급 부탁드리고요? 만약에 금융시장의 변동으로 인해서 순익 숫자가 기대치에 미치지 못한다고 할 경우에는 작년에 지급해 주신 그 주당 배당금을 바닥으로 잡아도 되는지 같이 말씀해 주시면 좋을 것 같습니다. 두 번째는 그 자산운용 관련된 부분인데요. 아마 2022년 정도에 발표하신 2030 중장기 전략 계획, 이 부분을 보면 이제 자산운용이랑 해외 보험사 부분에서 손익 기여도를 당시 15%에서 30%까지 확대시키는 거를 계획하고 계신 걸로 저희가 알고 있어요. 18페이지에 보면 2021년부터 매해 해외 펀드 그 지분 투자를 늘려오신 걸로 보여지는데요. 이런 노력들로 인해서 수익 기여도가 현재 어느 정도 수준으로 늘어났고, 앞으로의 계획이나 기대 효과에 대해서도 같이 언급 부탁드립니다. 감사합니다. Yes. The first comment is not so much a question but a request. I do understand that there are some constraints in terms of establishing the seasonality as you explained, but just going by the number that we got for the Q1 last year, it's hard for us to really tell. If you don't mind, if you could provide us with the CSM movement, maybe statement for last year, on a quarterly basis, also a P&L statement, also for last year on a quarterly basis, I think that would help us better understand. It seems overall for the Q1 this year there were a certain or actually quite a lot of one-off one-time items. On a normalized recurring basis, and it seems that your overall recurring earnings actually were a bit on the lower side. That considered, on a full year basis, what is your expectation for full year earnings this year? Also is the payout guidance of 35%-45% that you mentioned at the end of last year, early part of this year, is that still intact, and is that still what you have in mind? Also if there are changes to the financial market conditions and you are not able to meet your expectations in terms of earnings, is it still safe to assume that the DPS of last year would still be the bottom level? Anything, any DPS would still be above that level. Second question regarding asset management. I think, sometime last year you announced the 2030 mid to long-term strategy and plan, where you said the contribution of earnings from asset management and overseas insurance actually would be enlarged from 15% to 30%. On page 18, you see that almost every year since 2021, you have actually been increasing your equity investments into overseas funds and whatnot. As a result of those efforts, what is now the contribution from these initiatives? What is the plan, also the expected impact? Yes. This is head of the support team. You mentioned that it appears that there were certain one-off factors, resulting in a higher net income for Q1, and you asked about our full-year expectations. Our business plan purposes on a consolidated basis, we are working under the assumption of achieving KRW 1.8 trillion for full year this year. It depends on the interest rate, also the stock prices from the Q2 onward. It could actually impact our valuation gain or loss, so it is hard for us to say definitively. Currently our assumption is that we will be able to deliver at above KRW 1.8 trillion or above. Yes. In terms of, you know, the valuation gain or loss, we are actually disposing, or we have plans to further dispose of FVPL assets to reduce any increased volatility to our bottom line from these type of assets. In terms of the dividend payout, well, at the present position, at the present time, it is hard for us to actually present any hard target per se. As our CFO explained earlier, it will be determined in line with the actual performance as it is achieved. I will seek your understanding in that is the way it will be determined. I just wanted to comment that the KRW 1.8 trillion in net profit that I mentioned, we have incorporated into our business plan this year, is actually the consolidated number on a pre-tax basis. Because it is the budget planned number, please understand that it is not fixed or finalized. Yes. This is head of asset management. Let me take your question regarding the 2030 Asset Management Plan. 선제적으로 저희가 대응을 하고 있다고 생각합니다. Asset management of course is a key priority and focus area for us. I think in terms of the execution, we actually have been moving ahead of and more preemptively than any of our competitors in the market. 2030 전략을 처음 수립할 당시인 20년 여름에 원래 생각했던 스케줄보다는 다소 지연되고 있습니다만, 저희 슬라이드에서 보시는 바와 같이 전통 자산 분야 그리고 대체 자산 분야의 망라하는 운용사 지분을 취득하였고, 지역 구성에 있어서도 유럽뿐만이 아니라 미국 ETF 운용사 지분도 취득하였기 때문에 저희는 글로벌 운용체계 확립에 빠른 속도로 접근하고 있다고 생각합니다. Our 2030 strategy actually was formulated for the first time sometime in the summer of 2020. Relative to the schedule that we originally had in mind, there has been somewhat of a slight delay, but still, I think we have made significant progress. As you can see, we have made equity investments into key asset managers across major asset categories encompassing traditional assets, also alternative assets as well, and also have been very diverse in terms of the geographical coverage that we have achieved as we very fast rapidly ramp up toward our desired asset management structure. 이렇게 지분 투자한 회사들과의 파트너십, 그리고 Blackstone과 같은 전략적 협업을 통한 파트너십 체결은 저희 운용 사업을 통한 수익 제고뿐만이 아니라 저희의 전반적인 중장기 운용 수익률을 높이는 데에도 기여할 수 있다고 생각합니다. Our partnerships with the various equity partners, also our strategic collaboration with Blackstone will not only help us enhance the profitability of our asset management business itself, but also is expected to help boost our investment yields in the longer mid to long term. 결론적으로 말씀드리면 당초 세웠던 수립보다는 속도는 다소 지연되고 있습니다만 저희는 2030 플랜 계획을 달성하는데 차질 없이 진행하고 있고, 말씀드린 대로 2030년에 운용 부문의 수익 기여도가 30% 이상이 되는데, 온트랙으로 가고 있다고 말씀드리겠습니다. 이상입니다. To recap, although, compared to the original schedule, we are slightly behind. Nevertheless, we are moving along well according to the 2030 plan, with no setback. We are on track to achieve the 30% target that we outlined in the 2030 plan in terms of earnings contribution from asset management. Next, the person who will ask a question is MW Kim from JPM organ. The next question will be presented by MW Kim from JP Morgan. Please go ahead with your question. 예, 안녕하십니까? 질문 기회 주셔서 감사드립니다. 두 가지 여쭤보고 싶습니다. 첫 번째는, 아까 internal 이익에 대한 가이던스를 KRW 1.8 trillion 이렇게 말씀하셨는데 이 숫자가 굉장히 좀 보수적인 것 같아서 좀 여쭤봅니다. 제가 궁금한 부분은 지금 모든 재무 숫자가 IFRS 17으로 다 바뀌고, 솔벤시에 대한 제도도 K-ICS로 다 바뀐 이 시점에서 지금 회사의 KPI가 어떻게 지금 세팅이 됐고, management가 어떻게 이 성과 보수를 받으시는지에 대해서 그 구체적인 지표를 좀 말씀해 주시면 감사드리겠습니다. sales agent는 과거에는 신계약이 높은 그런 계약을 팔면 해서 보상을 많이 받는 그런 시스템이 있다 그러면 앞으로는 new business CSM이 좀 높은 그런 상품을 중심으로 해서 더 보상이 커지는 그런 구조로 가는지. 이 KPI에 대한 부분 내용이 좀 많이 담아있지 않아 가지고 제가 그 부분을 좀 여쭤보고 싶습니다. 저 다시 한번 확인하고 싶은 부분이 그 KRW 1.8 trillion이 실질적으로 회사 내부에서 생각하는 그런 어떻게 보면은 세전이익의 그 가이던스면 이 이익이 넘어가는 부분에 대해서는 management가 성과 평가 시에 더 많은 보너스를 받게 되는지 그것도 궁금합니다. 이제 두 번째로 여쭤보고 싶은 부분은 이제 그 재무제표가 이제 상당히 이제 economic capital에 가깝게 이제 바뀌어 가고 있는 그런 상황인데, 이제 현 시점에서 저희가 만약에 free surplus를 좀 생각해 본다 그러면 그 가장 지금 좋은 방법이 어떤 부분이고, 또 회사에서 생각하시는 현재 그 회사의 free surplus가 어느 정도라고 생각을 하시는지 이 부분 말씀해 주시면 감사드리겠습니다. Yes, I also thank you. I have two questions for you. You mentioned the KRW 1.8 trillion in pre-tax net profit as your internal guidance, internal view. It does appear very conservative to me. Given how, at present, the transition to IFRS 17 and the new K-ICS solvency scheme have all been complete, how have the KPIs for management, for example, been set or reset? If you could explain how the performance incentives of the management have been revised, I would appreciate it. What about the KPIs for the sales agents? Perhaps in the past, they received higher awards, rewards if they sold certain type of products. A higher portion of new business sales. What about going forward? If they sell high CSM products, will they receive greater compensation? I would like to know more about their incentive structure as well. The KRW 1.8 trillion in internal guidance for net profit this year, if you exceed that number, then does that mean that management may actually receive even a greater performance payout? The second question, it seems in terms of your overall financial statements, you are shifting towards more economic capital space structure. What is your approach toward free surplus? Also, what is the current level of free surplus? Yes, this is the head of the support team. Thank you. I'll take the first question. I just wanted to clarify, just in case that there may have been any misunderstanding regarding the internal guidance that I talked about earlier. With the adoption of IFRS 17, that however does not mean that the main management strategy of Samsung Life, in fact, has changed. It remains consistent as we continue to enhance our market dominance by focusing on strengthening our underlying core business, which is in-insurance, while also seeking e-efficiency gains in our earnings to continue to scale our pre-tax earnings. We actually again take into comprehensive consideration not only the earnings results, but other metrics as well in terms of growth, also other major parts of our competitiveness and strength, to take these factors into more balanced consideration. Because there is an increase in earnings, we would not be considering any increase to the incentive payouts of management on account of the earnings growth. Yes, this is the head of CPC. Let me take your second question. Actually it may have been a sub part of the first question. Sorry. You asked about our compensation scheme for sales agents linked to their CSM performance. Actually, we have been managing the CSM or the margins for all of our products on a case by case or product by product basis using EEV as the key metric. In calculating the agent fee or commissions, we actually use a conversion from that EEV to calculate the payable commissions. Under IFRS 17, we continue to use EEV and also CSM that will be factored into calculating the agent fee. That kind of scheme will continue. Yes. This is the head of the RM team. Let me take your second question. As of the end of last year, our K-ICS ratio was 210%. For this year, we're expecting 210%-220%. It is true that we have at least a 60 percentage point surplus above the regulatory threshold of 150%. But it is still early, since the implementation of K-ICS and actually the authorities, we understand are seeking to revise some parts of the scheme as well. Changes in the market interest rates also can affect the K-ICS ratio as well. I think we should wait perhaps until the system has become more stabilized, before, you know, commenting on how it could potentially impact our shareholder return policies. Thank you. The next question will be presented by Seung -gun Kang from KB Securities. Please go ahead with your question. Yes. Yes. Thank you. I would like to first ask about your risk adjustment. I think the total balance is KRW 3 trillion. In the Q1, you had about KRW 152 billion in RA reversal. Compared to other companies, you know, I think it seems you had quite a high rate of reversal versus the total. It could be due to a difference in your portfolio or methodology. If you could explain the reason why I'd appreciate it. Second question regarding the variable guarantee products and your earnings from variables. I think sometime last year you explained that after IFRS 17 is adopted, that will result in a de facto 100% hedging against the variable guarantees. It, and you mentioned that the sensitivity will be significantly reduced. It does seem that volatility has come down significantly in the Q1. In Q1, given how the interest rates have gone down and the stock markets have actually climbed, under ordinary circumstances, we might have expected a reversal on your variable, a reverse, but then in fact you recorded a negative. Was this due to any one-off factor, and what is your outlook, going forward, in terms of the directionality, depending on changes to the interest rates, also market conditions? Yes. This is the head of the actuarial team. Let me take your first question on RA. In terms of the RA, the valuation method, it is clearly stipulated in the IFRS standards, whereas, in terms of what kind of methodology should be applied, in the RA reversals, actually that is not included, clearly in the standards. It does seem that different companies may be applying different projection methodologies for the reversals. Actually, one of the reasons why we actually saw a big RA reverse in the Q1 is actually due to our financial type products, including savings and annuities, where we have a bell of KRW 115 trillion. In terms of the hedge risk, actually there's actually a bit of a heavy concentration early on immediately following the IFRS transition. There is more of a release over the subsequent periods, which is why in the very beginning, we recorded quite high KRW 115 billion, or excuse me, quite high reversals. Because the accounting treatment or the method applied by the different companies actually is quite different for the reversal, there are discussions amongst the industry players, also the accounting firms, about possible standardization of the method. If i t takes place, then, we will communicate with you, what kind of, more in greater detail what kind of impact we have on our side. This is head of asset management. Let me explain more about the variable guarantee hedging. With the transition to IFRS 17, the scope of hedged instruments actually has been expanded beyond just the guaranteed type option products to include our total variable product portfolio. We're tightly managing against any valuation changes for our entire portfolio. So in terms of the actual results for the Q1, for impact from changing stock prices or interest rates or other market variables, we were able to effectively and optimally manage against those risks by using derivative type products. Whereas, for any changes from economic or changes to economic assumptions which cannot be hedged using derivatives, I think that was the key part of the results that we saw in Q1. Overall, we believe that the interest rate sensitivity overall has been reduced, and we'll continue to use derivatives and other more advanced hedging techniques to continue to manage against volatility in our earnings. The next question will be presented by Do-ha Kim from Hana Investment & Securities. Please go ahead with your question. Yeah. I actually have a recommendation to begin with. In terms of the financial statements or the numbers that you provided, I understand that because this is the first conference call after fully reflecting the IFRS standards, your format whatnot may not be necessarily fixed yet. Although you do provide the numbers statement based on IFRS standards, we would also explain if you could also provide the BS and P&L that are consistent with the regulatory standards of the Korean authorities as well. To have a more time series type of understanding, rather than just providing just a snapshot view, we would need to be able to do more comparison relative to same time last year or compared to end of last year. If you could provide more of those types of details, we would also appreciate it. In terms of the non, the investment profit from your, excuse me, regarding the corporate pension, also the variable earnings, if you could break that down between the regular accounts and the special accounts, we'd appreciate it. Yes, this is the Head of the Finance Team. Just because of the time, I think I'll just briefly answer that we will get or provide the information to you through the IR team 다음으로 질문해 주실 분은 Morgan Stanley의 최희원 님입니다. The next question will be presented by Heew on Choi from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead with your question. 네, 안녕하세요. 먼저 시간이 상당히 지났음에도 질문 기회 주셔서 감사합니다. 저는 앞서 대답해 주신 내용 중에 한 가지만 더 확인하고자 질문을 드리려고 하는데요. 앞서 말씀해 주시기로 올해 경영계획상 내부적으로 목표로 하시는 세전이익 규모가 약 KRW 1.8 trillion 정도라고 하셨는데, 이 부분이 이번 1Q에 상당 부분 발생했던 것과 같은 평가손익 등의 일회성 요인은 제외한 어떤 경상이익 수준으로 말씀을 해주신 것인지 궁금하고요. 물론 아직 손익에 대한 불확실성이 높은 상황이라서 말씀 작년 수준의 DPS는 기대할 수 있다고 보는 것이 합리적인지 주주환원 관련해서 가이던스 한 번만 다시 확인 부탁드립니다. 감사합니다. Yeah. I would also like to thank you for giving us more time. We actually passed the scheduled time quite significantly. I just wanted to check. You mentioned that for your internal business plan purposes, you're working against the guidance of KRW 1.8 trillion in pre-tax earnings for this year. Just to be clear, is that exclusive of valuation gains and other one-off factors that you saw in the Q1? Is that on a normalized basis? I'd like to ask. Also, I understand that there are still uncertainties. Different factors may impact your earnings. I understand how it may be difficult for you to say, but considering the dividend payout guidance of 35%-45% that you mentioned, when you do the calculation against KRW 1.8 trillion, it doesn't seem that the DPS hike, the growth rate will necessarily be very high. Regardless of what the actual earnings results are, is it fair to say that we can expect a DPS that at least matches the level of last year? 안녕하십니까? CFO Sun Kim입니다. 답변드리겠습니다. 먼저 그 당연히 경영계획을 할 때 저희가 뭐 변동성 있는 손익에 대한 계획은 잡지 않기 때문에 평합과 손익이나 이런 부분에 대해서는 계획에 반영되어 있지 않습니다. For our business planning, and this is the CFO, we do not factor in any one-off or any type of gains where there is uncertainty. It is on a normalized basis. 연간 손익은 뭐 사실은 당연히 지금 전망하기는 어려운 숫자고요. 다만 이제 1Q까지의 추세를 놓고 보면 전체적으로 CSM이 계획보다는 증가를 하고 있기 때문에 저희가 계획한 것보다는 연간 순이익이 늘어나지 않을까라는 생각은 현재는 갖고 있는데, 이건 좀 시간을 갖고 좀 지켜봐야 할 것 같습니다. At this time, it is really hard for us to project, you know, how much our full year earnings will actually be. Given the trends that we have observed of throughout the Q1, it does seem that CSM growth actually has been stronger than we expected. We, our thought right now is that likely on a full year basis, our earnings may be above our expectation at this point. Again, we will have to watch and see how it plays out with more time. 마지막으로 이제 배당은 뭐 이익이 늘어난다면 저희가 배당을 줄이거나 그런 정책을 택하는 것은 시장이 기대하는 바와 상치될 수 있기 때문에 당연히 이익이 늘어나는 한은 배당금액은 늘어나지 않을까 저희도 생각을 하고 있고요. 다만 이제 연간 손익에 따라서 그다음에 그때 당시의 K-ICS나 이런 재무건전성에 따라서 율이 얼마가 될지 여부에 대해서는 연간 손익 추이를 놓고 그다음에 여러 가지 요소를 감안을 해서 결정을 해서 그래서 시장과 소통을 해드리도록 하겠습니다. 감사합니다. In terms of dividends, obviously, if we see a earnings growth but then decrease our dividends, that as earnings grow, our dividend payouts will also grow. In terms of the actual percentage, we will have to again watch actual developments in terms of how our full year earnings shape up. Also, our financial soundness, including K-ICS. We'll have to see at that point of time how it is shaping up as well. We will be taking these factors into consideration, and we'll be communicating them with the market once they are fixed. 다음으로 질문해 주실 분은 JP Morgan의 김명옥 님입니다. The next question will be presented by MW Kim from JP Morgan. Please go ahead with your question. 예, 다시 질문 기회 주셔서 감사드립니다. 그 아까 좀 질문드렸던 KPI 관련된 부분을 좀 다시 한번 좀 여쭤보고 싶은데요. 이제 제가 기억하기로 이제 지난 분기에 실적 발표를 하실 때 그 자기자본하고 이제 CSM을 합한 이 값을 이제 기업 가치의 어떻게 보면 proxy다라고 이렇게 좀 장표로 보여주셨던 그런 기억이 있습니다. 이제 좀 궁금한 부분이 실질적으로 이제 New Business CSM이 지금 증가하는 그런 것과 아니면은 이 부채에 있는 CSM 자체가 성장하는 요런 지표들이 실제로 Management KPI에 이 지표로 바뀌면서 좀 들어가 있고, 이런 부분이 좀 중요하게 회사에서 생각하는 그런 지표인지 한 번만 확인해 주시면 감사드리겠습니다. Yes. I just want to ask a quick question again regarding KPI. I think I remember sometime in the previous quarter in one of your slides, there was a mention that you will look at the combination of CSM plus shareholder equity as a proxy for corporate value. As new business CSM increases and as CSM from your total liabilities increases, will this be incorporated into the management KPI? Just wanted to do a final check whether this is in fact a very important, will be an important metric. 예, 그 부분은 지원팀에서 답변드리겠습니다. 질문하신 대로 그 CSM 확대 부분은 저희 회사의 주요 KPI로 들어가 있고요. 저희가 성장성의 지표로 지금 관리를 하고 있습니다. 이상입니다. This is head of support. Yes, it is true that increasing CSM is actually a major important KPI for our company. It is included under the growth category. 이것으로 질의응답 세션을 종료하겠습니다. This concludes today's Q&A session. 연락 주시면 답변드리도록 하겠습니다. 감사합니다. Please contact our team for any follow-up questions. Thank you