The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is that the defendant was aware of the negligence at the time of preparing a false evaluation table as stated in the facts charged of this case, but the defendant cannot be found guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground that the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was a public official in charge of D related affairs while working with the Water and Wastewater Works Headquarters C from January 20, 201 to April 22, 2012 in the original city, and currently served in the original city E.

On March 16, 2012, the Defendant, at the above C division office, conducted the evaluation of the business performance capabilities of eight enterprises participating in the bid for operation and management services entrusted to the private sector (hereinafter “instant bid”), and prepared the said business performance capabilities evaluation table (hereinafter “instant evaluation table”) by using a computer for the purpose of using it as meeting data to select a tendering company (hereinafter “instant bidding”).

The Defendant indicated 4.5 points in the column for the mechanical performance evaluation of a participant supervisor in each field, among the items of project performance evaluation of HTT Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “HTT”), as a tendering company, as 0.63 points in the column for the project performance evaluation of CHT Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “CA”), although the Defendant stated as 0.63 points in the column for the “AWT education and training” among the items of project performance evaluation of CBT Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “CB”), the Defendant stated as 1.82 points in the column for the “performance of environmental technology” among the items of project performance evaluation of CBT Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “CBT”), the tendering company stated as 2 points in the “performance

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the defendant is the holder of the Water Supply and Waterworks Business Headquarters at the original city, which is an official document.