If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

The defendant is the assistant principal of the E High School in the Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-do, and the F is the contracting officer of the above High School, G is the above high school teacher, and the victim's Korea Productivity Center is a corporation that carries out business such as issuing information technology qualification certificates.

Around 10:00 on November 9, 2012, the day before the examination was conducted, the Defendant anticipated that it would be difficult to acquire the said IT Q due to lack of practical ability while preparing a written test in order to acquire the said IT Q, and requested F to apply for the said IT Q test on behalf of the Defendant at the 1st floor of the above high school, which was in charge of computer work, and F received the said request.

At around 14:00 on November 9, 2012, the Defendant: (a) requested G selected as a test supervisor in the second floor of the high school to put the above IT Q test on behalf of the above F on behalf of the test supervisor; and (b) accepted G’s request.

Accordingly, from around 10:30 on November 10, 2012 to around 11:30 on the same day, F pretended to be the Defendant from the first high school to the first high school, and prepared and submitted the answer sheet by releasing the problem of the IT Q examination. G knew of the above fact, he received the answer sheet, and as a result, the Defendant acquired the said IT Q around November 29, 2012.

In collusion with F and G, the Defendant interfered with the issuance of information technology certificates by fraudulent means.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made in each police interrogation protocol against F and G;

1. A statement on the details of acquisition of information technology qualifications;

1. Application of the respective visual Acts and subordinate statutes to the list of applicants for the examination, list of signatures, and the file for an answer to an examination of information technology qualifications;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 314 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the Defendant has a duty to mislead students.