Defendant

The appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) of the original judgment (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

It is reasonable to take into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime and reflects his mistake in depth; (b) has been engaged in public educational officials in good faith for more than 30 years; (c) appears not to have been easy to refuse the D’s request made by the F Supervisory Office of Chungcheongnam-do Office of Education in charge of G; (d) Pakistan’s disease, dementia, etc.; (e) must support a pregnant woman suffering from dementia; and (e) the first offender who has no criminal power.

However, the crime of this case is very serious in that the defendant, as a member of the examination committee for the evaluation of the field H in the field of the field of the examination conducted by the education specialist in the Cheongnam-do Office of Education in 2012, the defendant, as the member of the examination committee for the examination of the field of the field of the education specialist, was informed only to the specific applicants after receiving the examination request from the F supervising official in charge, and leaked the examination problem in advance, and the defendant has seriously damaged the fairness of the education specialist examination and the trust in the education specialist examination. In preparation for the receipt of the cell phone for the security of the problem at the time of the preparation of the problem, the defendant brought two cellular phones in advance and secured contact with D by submitting only one of them. In light of the fact that the defendant was in close contact with D during the grading process, and it is not good that the crime is committed against the defendant.

Accordingly, the scope of the recommended sentence on the instant crime according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Sentencing Commission is from 1 year to 3 years of imprisonment, the obstruction of the performance of official duties, the Type 2 (Obstruction of the Performance of Official Duties by Fraudulent Means), the special person (where the degree of obstruction of official duties is serious), the decision-making of the recommended area (where the degree of obstruction of official duties is serious), the scope of the recommended sentence (1 to 3 years), and all other sentencing conditions such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, the background of the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime.