The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant has contributed to the completion of the thesis by attending seminars on the subject of the thesis in relation to two parts of the performance thesis necessary for the request for review of a doctoral degree thesis and providing ideas. As such, the Defendant is qualified as the author of the performance thesis.

In addition, the defendant participated in the whole process of the experiment related to a doctoral degree thesis, analyzed academicly on the surface of experimental data, and suggested I to proceed with the experiment again according to the results.

In other words, the defendant has been actively involved in the whole process of performing experiments, such as academic interpretation and setting directions for experiments.

Nevertheless, the court below did not examine I as to the witness and judged that the defendant completed the thesis by collecting experimental data necessary for preparing a thesis from G and I without participating in the experiment related to a doctoral degree thesis. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts due to incomplete deliberation.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty in light of the evidence duly admitted and investigated. In so doing, the lower court convicted the Defendant on the ground that the instant facts charged could be recognized.

B. In preparing a scientific work with the degree of master’s degree as a general rule, it is necessary to deem that it is permissible for other persons to receive simple and technical assistance, such as translation of foreign books or statistical data processing, in the course of preparing the thesis. However, the author is the most important thing to gather and analyze necessary documents or data in accordance with the framework of the thesis drawn up by guidance professors focusing on the preparation of the dissertation, and complete this as the author’s instructions by guidance professors.