The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., the form of punishment) of the lower court is unreasonable in view of the following: (a) the Defendant divided his/her mistake into, and reflected against, his/her own misconduct; (b) the disclosure of non-disclosure test problems; (c) most public officials’ examination issues were made public; (d) the disclosure of the public officials’ examination issues is the fact that a considerable part of the non-disclosure problem is leaked; (e) the occurrence of the actual examination problem does not occur; (e) there is no criminal record; (e) the suspension of execution becomes final and conclusive; and (e) the cancellation of the permission of a private teaching institute and the maintenance of livelihood is considerably difficult.

2. Taking into account the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, the instant crime is that: (a) the Defendant prepared the instant crime until the time the Defendant was inside the Malamer to leak the non-disclosure test problem; (b) made the employees of the private teaching institute that operated the instant crime take the non-disclosure test issue by wearing the lamer while wearing the lamer; and (c) the reason why the pertinent examination issue is non-disclosure is given is that the form of the problem bank is an issue; (b) if the problem is leaked in itself, which is highly likely to be actually given to the pertinent examination; and (c) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime for the purpose of raising the pass rate of the students of the private teaching institute operated by him/her and attracting more private teaching institute students through the leakage of the non-disclosure test problem, and (d) if the Defendant’s action such as the instant crime is somewhat punished, the pertinent private teaching institute uses unlawful methods rather than justifiable competition through high-quality training.