Defendant

All appeals filed by A, B, C, and Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A, B, and C1 (which was employed as new human resources in the latter part of the year of 2015): Defendant A merely speaks to the effect that it appears to be illegal to the extent that it does not instruct the employment of AB, AC, and AD or to manipulate the test scores of human and aptitude (see, e.g., Defendant A)C and AD include 15 persons who passed the test scores of human and aptitude, regardless of the manipulation of test scores, and thus, the interview results constitute an impossible crime with no possibility of interference of interview by interview members. Since the interview results were conducted without knowing the transfer scores, the interview results were conducted without risk of infringement of legal interest (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 1) and AC and CD constitute one person subject to suspended execution, regardless of the manipulation of aptitude and test scores, and there was no change in the direction of the examination committee and the examination committee (the examination committee) to the public prosecutor and the examination committee (the examination committee) to the public prosecutor and the examination committee (the examination committee).

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants by the prosecutor (one year of imprisonment, one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of suspended sentence, ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of suspended sentence, and three million won of fine) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Judgment as to the misapprehension of legal principles or mistake of facts by Defendant A and C

A. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on the assertion that Defendant A did not instruct the employment, etc.