All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is that Defendant A’s overall control over Defendant B’s personnel affairs and made a statement to E as described in the facts charged in this case should be deemed to have notified the contents of gender discrimination in employing workers. However, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants on the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts which affected the conclusion of

2. The following additional circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below: ① 6 applicants, including E, have passed the second written examination from among 20 applicants who passed the first document screening process in the instant regular recruitment examination (14 men and 6 women); excluding E, 1 male and 1 female workers have passed the final examination; 2) in the court of the original instance, there is also Defendant A among the applicants, who entered the first written examination in the regular recruitment examination of this case, with the recommendation of Defendant A, to the effect that “I will not have any other motive, such as Defendant A’s oral interview, and that I will not have any other motive, i.e., “I will have any other female workers who will attend the examination.” On the day before the day of the interview, I will not have any other motive, i.e., “I will have any other female workers who will attend the examination.”