The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

C. Pronouncement of a sentence shall be suspended.

Defendant

Of the facts charged against C

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B did not have accepted and consented to the modification of the respective motor vehicle register of this case from the upper Defendant A, and did not know that the said modified motor vehicle register is used as a tender screening document for the D business ordered by the F agency. Thus, Defendant B cannot be established with respect to the alteration, exercise, and bidding interference with Defendant B.

B. Defendant C did not comply with the Defendant’s order to modify the instant vehicle register, but did not receive any prior notice on the use of the altered document. As such, Defendant C did not constitute an alteration of the official document, event, and interference with bidding against the Defendant C.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant B is the head of the logistics headquarters headquarters of Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) and the head of the headquarters of the business logistics team of the Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), who takes overall charge of the tendering affairs related to the G service contract ordered by the F agency; Defendant A is the person in charge of the sales logistics one team of E; Defendant C is the business logistics one team.

E In order to participate in the tender of “D services” ordered on September 24, 2015 at the F agency, and to be selected as a senior contractor, E received points exceeding 85 points in the evaluation of qualification examination in order to be selected as a final successful tenderer. However, the situation was that the number of non-vibration vehicles owned in the performance equipment item (at least three non-vibration vehicles holding more than three vehicles) with nine points is not less than 8 points because the number of non-vibration vehicles owned was not more than 2 points, and the total of the performance equipment points and other items are anticipated to be 84.03 points, and the qualification examination evaluation criteria is less than 85 points.

⑴ 공문서 변조 및 변조공문서행사 ㈎ 피고인 B, 상피고인 A의 공동범행 위와 같이 무진동 차량 보유대수의 부족으로 E이 적격심사 평가를 통과하지 못할 것이 예상되자, 2015. 9.경...