2019go 1056 (a) Business obstruction teachers

(b) Interference with business;

(c) Alteration of private documents;

1. A.

2.(c) B

Is-in-court (public trial) and court (public trial)

Law Firm C (For the defendant)

Attorney D

June 20, 2019

Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and by imprisonment for eight months.

However, the execution of each of the above punishment against the Defendants shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

Defendant A is the chief executive officer of the school juristic person G to which E middle schools and F High Schools belong, and Defendant B is an executive officer of the above FF High Schools around 2002 and works as the chief executive office from September 2012.

G An educational foundation shall appoint one Korean language and one regular teacher, respectively, to work in F High School from 2014. Around November 15, 2013, "100 points for the first written examination, 100 points for the second interview, 100 points for the third interview, and 100 points for the first written examination. The first written examination is to be selected within five times the number of the selected students, referring to the first written examination, the second and third written examination is to be conducted only for those who have passed the first and third written examination, and the second and third written examination is to be conducted within six times the total number of the selected students, and the first and third written examination is to be determined as those who have applied for the second and third written examination from 2014 to 100 points for the second and the second written examination was to be conducted from 2013 to 213.11.21.21.21.

1. Defendant A - Interference with business;

On December 2, 2013, the Defendant listened to the horses that H, who had worked as a Korean language and a fixed-term teacher at a middle school from the vice principal of E middle school, around the period of the public announcement, has been a good character, and at this time, H was born to pass the public announcement.

On December 22, 2013, the Defendant received a report from B, who was the head of FF High School administrative office, that “H was unable to take the first written examination because it was impossible to take the first written examination as 6 and 5 times,” and that “B was unable to take the interview,” and that “B was unable to take the interview because it was a failure to pass the first written examination.” However, the Defendant sent the second direction to “B to take measures so that H can see the first interview,” and let B treat it as having passed the first written examination.

B, on December 22, 2013, at the F High School's corporate office located in J of J in Chang-gu, Changwon-si, J around December 22, 2013, he treated H as passing the first written examination with 3 et al. by making a correct response to the 19 questions in H's Korean language and test paper.

Accordingly, the Defendant instigated B to interfere with the employment of regular teachers of the interview officer and the school juristic person G through a deceptive scheme.

2. Defendant B - Alteration of private documents and interference with business

On December 22, 2013, the Defendant: (a) pursuant to the direction of the above A; (b) pursuant to the F High School Office in J of J of J of J of J of J of Chang-si; (c) pursuant to the text No. 19, the Defendant indicated X-ray’s Korean language and test site No. 19; and (d) adjusted the above answer site at a five-time period of answer; (c) adjusted the total point of H from 67.35 to 68.75 points to create three, etc. among the applicants for Korean language and support. On December 31, 2013, the Defendant continued to undergo the first written examination; (d) conducted an interview with the above school juristic person’s inspector for the purpose of using the first written examination to determine whether he/she passed the first written examination; and (e) conducted an interview with the above school juristic person’s official for the purpose of using the first one’s national language and interview; and (e) conducted the above interview with the above one’s executive officer for the first day after obtaining approval.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the N in the police station;

1. A written accusation and a written request for investigation;

1. A copy of the Korean language and test paper;

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles 314(1), 313, and 31(1) of the Criminal Act; Defendant B who choose to imprisonment with labor: Articles 314(1) and 313 of the Criminal Act; Article 231 of the Criminal Act; Article 231 of the Criminal Act; and the choice of imprisonment with labor;

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendant B: former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendants: The reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act interfered with the recruitment of Defendants to pass H as a regular teacher of F. In this case, the biggest de facto victim in the instant case is the de facto supporter, and the damage therefrom is highly likely to be socially criticized because it is difficult to recover. Furthermore, Defendant B was punished by a fine for a similar crime.

However, Defendant A was employed as a regular teacher of F.C., which is converted into a general high-level, by evaluating the loyalty and ability of H, which was a temporary teacher affiliated with the same school foundation E, and does not seem to have committed the instant crime under the direction of Defendant A, the chief executive officer, who is the chief executive officer, with the intent to make an illegal solicitation or take economic benefits. In addition, Defendant A committed the instant crime in accordance with the direction of Defendant A, the chief executive officer, and Defendant A did not have any history of punishment exceeding the suspension of the execution of the same criminal records or imprisonment without prison labor, and Defendant B did not have any history of punishment in addition to the above fine. Defendants were aware of the fact of the instant crime from the initial investigation to the court

In addition, the defendants' age, character and conduct, environment, support relationship, motive, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime are considered, the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of the various circumstances.

Judges Kim Gin-ju