The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

The following seizures are from the accused:

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) 1 of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles: ① Defendant 2’s two daughters B, and C did not interfere with the business of academic performance management by committing unlawful acts such as referring to the answer site before the examination; ② Defendant did not leak his answer site to F and regular examinations to his daughters. The lower court acknowledged the instant facts charged without direct evidence, but it is difficult to see that the instant facts charged was proven without any reasonable doubt solely based on indirect evidence as indicated in its reasoning. 2 of unfair sentencing is unreasonable because the punishment imposed by the lower court (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unfair.

2. In a criminal trial and the principle of free evaluation of evidence based on indirect evidence, the formation of a conviction shall not be necessarily formed by direct evidence, but may be formed by indirect evidence unless it violates the empirical and logical rules. Even if indirect evidence does not have a complete probative value as to an offense individually, if it is deemed that there exists such probative value by comprehensively examining the entire evidence in mutual relation, it can also be acknowledged by indirect evidence.

Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act stipulating the principle of free evaluation of evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do4392, Nov. 27, 2001). The probative value of evidence is left to a judge’s free judgment, but such judgment ought to be consistent with logical and empirical rules.

The degree of the formation of a conviction to be found guilty in a criminal trial should be such that there is no reasonable doubt, but to the extent that it does not require any possible doubt.

It is reasonable to reject evidence which has probative value by causing a suspicion without reasonable grounds.