However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The Defendant, from January 20, 2012 to October 15, 2014, worked as the director of G Art Gallery (public official Grade II) and took overall charge of the recruitment of researchers of G Art Gallery in 2013.

On August 1, 2013, G Art Museum published a public announcement of the recruitment of career researchers (one person in the Easternology, one person in the modern art theory, and four persons in the art gallery education field, including H and I, in total 96 persons including H and I.

Around September 4, 2013, the Defendant knew that he applied for H and I in the G Art Gallery located in Jungcheon-gu, Gyeonggi-do, for a pro-friendly relationship with the principal of the Pyeongtaek and that he applied for the document screening process, and then divided conversations between J and personnel in charge of the management of G art gallery facilities and personnel management, office assistants K and others, and the fields required by the examination committee. After the completion of the examination, the Defendant was aware of the fact that H, who applied for the field of modern art theory, was unable to reach the order of successful applicants in the document screening process, based on the report of “the screening grading sheet of documents” and “the results of the document screening” and “the results of the document screening conducted by the J.

Accordingly, the Defendant classified H’s name in “the comprehensive result of the document screening” as his fingers, and instructed the J to the effect that H may pass the document screening. According to the Defendant’s direction, the J changed the H’s score given by L examiners into the full scores of 10 points of each 10 points, thereby allowing H to be subject to the document screening, etc., and changed the revised document screening.