2013 Highest 4034 Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties by Fraudulent Means

Park -○, Public Officials

Jinsung (Institution of Prosecution), leaptable (Public Trial)

Attorney Gangnam-nam et al., Counsel for the defendant

January 17, 2014

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Facts of crime

1. Presumed facts

The open screening process for the education specialist in the 2012-year Office of Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, shall be conducted: ① receipt of applications and documents (from June 27, 2012 to June 28, 2012), ② publication of a person subject to the essay (a person who passed the document screening, July 9, 2012), ③ publication of a subject of the interview ( July 14, 2012), ④ publication of a person subject to the interview ( July 20, 2012), ⑤ interview (by July 28, 2012), ⑤ On-site evaluation (by the on-site evaluation, July 30, 2012), and ④ Publication of a person subject to the interview (by the on-site evaluation, July 28, 2012).

From March 1, 2011 to February 28, 2013, the Ansan-do Office of Education, as a supervisory official in charge of the development of teachers' policy and teachers' ability, takes charge of the affairs of elementary school personnel as a senior inspector in charge of the affairs of elementary school personnel, and has overall control over the management task of the field of the early screening, including the determination of the number of persons to be selected in the field of the early screening, the selection of members preparing questions and interview evaluation questions, the management of the answer sheet and the grading process, so that the field and interview evaluation can be conducted fairly and fairly.

As an assistant principal of ○ elementary school, the Defendant was an assistant principal of 2012 an open screening process (hereinafter referred to as "open screening process") with education specialist in 24th grade.

Park Jong-ri was the principal of an elementary school; this ○○ elementary school teacher; Park Jong-gu was the school physician of the △△ elementary school; the Gangwon △△△△△△ school teacher; and the △△△△△△△△△△△ school teacher.

2. Crimes;

In order to pass the applicants who are known to him (hereinafter referred to as "illegal applicants") from among the applicants in the field of the draft screening process, the ○○○ was selected as the examination examiners in the field of the draft screening process, and the questions were leaked by the persons selected as the examination examiners in the field of the draft screening process, and the applicants were willing to pass the examination by informing them of the problems in advance.

Around July 7, 2012, ○○○ stated that “The defendant is aware that the problem is being leaked to the members preparing questions at the same time,” in the coffee shop near the Samnam-gu, YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY.

On July 13, 2012, the Defendant informed ○○ of the six questions of the essay evaluation using a cell phone that was hidden after the completion of the agenda evaluation system for the first instance of the open screening in *** in the penta, and then the Defendant informed ○○ of the six questions of the essay evaluation.

Anal○○, 1 July 13, 2012, 201, 200, 2000, 2000,000,000

After allowing the Defendant to call another person's mobile phone with another person's mobile phone, the Defendant informed △△△△△△ of six issues related to the instant evaluation, which was leaked from the Defendant. ② On the same day, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, 7, △△△△△△△, notified △△△△△ of three to four issues among the six issues related to the instant evaluation. ③ On the same day, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, 7, △△△△△, △△△, 7) notified △△△△△, who applied for the first instance of the open screening, and notified △△△△△△, who applied for the first instance of the open screening on the same day. On the same day, Park Jong-gu, Dong-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and 7) notified △△△△△△, who applied for the first instance of the open screening on the same day.

On July 14, 2012, 2011, Park Young-dong Education and Training Institute of Cheong-dong, Hong-dong, Hongnam-do, 88-5, prepared answers to the above six issues, and passed the essay evaluation examination.

As a result, the Defendant conspired with inside ○○, gambling, and gambling in a successive manner, and thereby interfered with legitimate performance of duties regarding the punishment for disclosure of educational service in the 24th educational service, such as the members who did not participate in the crime, and the members of the Chungcheongnam-do Office of Education Committee on the Opening of Public Service in Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, and the members of the Chungcheongnam-do Education Specialized Committee on the Disclosure of Public Service in the 2012.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each protocol of interrogation of the suspect about Ansan-○○ Park by the prosecution;

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the selection of punishment for the crime;

Articles 137 and 30 (Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

Reasons for sentencing

[Scope of Recommendation] The obstruction of Performance of Official Duties, the obstruction of performance of official duties (Type 2), the aggravation area, one year to three years of imprisonment

· Major reasons for the commission (negative): planned crimes

· Major reasons for entry (affirmative): No history of criminal punishment;

· Reasons for general participation (affirmative): distinct social relationship between him/her and his/her poor reflector, or there is no longer criminal record of suspension of execution or more.

[Determination of Sentence] One year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution

- The defendant, as a public educational official in a position with considerable morality and responsibilities in line with his/her authority, shall be borne by him/her.

In spite of being required to do so, it is actively involved in the planned crime, such as eliminating it and divulging the problem.

It infringes on the fairness of personnel, and causes the general public to feel in the whole of the educational community.

In addition, it has undermined the morale of the majority of the public educational officials who work impliedly and faithfully.

Considering that it is necessary to punish an offender.

Although not leading the crime, it shall be prepared in advance as well as members preparing questions evaluation and grading as members.

The crime is committed, such as exercising undue influence during the post-marking process after the outflow of the problem.

The degree of fenced shall not be less than

In particular, the whole structure of the crime is the core part of the "Leakage of the questions to be drawn".

It has served as a key role even if all crimes are not planned, led, or controlled.

corresponding punishment is inevitable.

· Crimes such as returning one of them after having prepared two mobile phones while entering the examination committee;

of this section, the manner and manner of the transfer of

Although the defendant does not seem to have shown a trace of promoting a specific and economic interest individually, the crime is committed.

participation in the meeting, thereby seeking intangible benefits, such as expectationing the issuance of a school principal at an early stage;

deemed to have been appointed

Considerations, such as primary offenders, serious reflectivity, and the fact that a person works as a public educational official for a long time, etc.

Judges Choi Dok-ho