The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of community service work, 200 hours of confiscation) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendant committed such crime even though the Defendant was a law school at C University, seeking to be a legal professional, and committed such crime. The Defendant’s crime of this case, in addition to storing the examination issue in USB, installed a hacking program and automatically sent the examination issue via the computer to the Defendant’s e-mail, etc. on some computers, and committed a crime more than once over the first semester and the second semester of 2013, which is very poor in quality of the crime. When the hacking program installed in the professor’s computer was deleted, the Defendant did not waive the crime even if the hacking program was deleted; the Defendant damaged the fair evaluation procedure and deprived students of relative deprivation of students in good faith; and the Defendant’s crime of this case resulted in the Defendant’s violation of the sexual law school evaluation process at law schools.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, the defendant was the first offender, the defendant was permanently removed from C University Law School, and there was no possibility of becoming a legal professional, and the amount equivalent to the scholarship already received has been recovered, the student's sexual records suffered from the crime of this case appear to have been properly corrected after the above misconduct, there was no evidence that the student suffered disadvantage in employment, etc. due to sexual records before the revision, the court stated that the victims of this case who attended and stated to the investigative agency was not wanting to be punished by the defendant, and the family members and members of the defendant's family.