The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The Defendant stated that the victim F was a person who caused the revocation of the school principal recruitment system at K elementary school on two occasions is merely the purport that “at K elementary school, the Defendant did not implement the school principal recruitment system, and the cause was F,” and it does not necessarily mean that “F, who followed the procedure of subscribing at K elementary school, followed the procedure itself by the procedure of subscribing at the school,” and it is consistent with the objective and important part, and is related to the public interest, and thus, the lower court convicted the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, even if illegality was dismissed pursuant to Article 310 of the Criminal Act.

Judgment

The expression "Revocation" does not mean that it was retired while applying for the school principal recruitment system in an internal manner, but it is easy to understand that the procedure was revoked by a competent institution, such as the Office of Education, etc. while applying for the school principal recruitment system to the Office of Education, etc.

In particular, during the Defendant’s second statement, it includes the part that the “I implemented the school principal recruitment system” was revoked due to the defect in the bid at K Elementary School, and it is clear that the Defendant had already applied for the school principal recruitment system through the expression “Revocation” and the procedure was revoked while being implemented. However, the expression “cancellation” can be presented to a certain extent that the competent agency, such as the Office of Education, acknowledges and cancels the procedure that F is at issue. As such, the lower court, from December 2010, obtained internal opinion on whether parents of K Elementary School, teachers, school teachers, and school operating committee would implement the school principal recruitment system. However, there were many opposing opinions.