The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles and improper sentencing) is as follows: (a) on June 10, 2016, the Defendant actually determined to F on June 10, 201 the list of households in the list of C University D Camps dormitory fixtures (hereinafter “the list of this case”) and the list of goods purchased and the supplier prior to the de facto determination of the list of goods and the contract for procurement was not likely to be modified.

Therefore, even if the list of this case is disclosed, it cannot be affected by the household purchase contract, and there is no risk of infringing the national function, such as the fairness of the procurement contract, and there is no value to protect the list as confidential. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the list constitutes a secret, which is the object of

Even if the defendant is found guilty, the sentence of the court below (4 months of imprisonment, 1 year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 127 of the Criminal Act provides that a person who is or was a public official shall divulge a secret in the course of performing his/her duties pursuant to the law. It does not protect the secret itself, but rather protects the benefits that may be dangerous by the infringement of a public official’s duty of confidentiality, i.e., the function of the country threatened by the leakage of secret.

Here, “occupational secrets under Acts and subordinate statutes” includes matters which are not necessarily defined as confidential or classified as confidential under Acts and subordinate statutes, and include matters of considerable interest in which the Government, public offices, or citizens are not informed to the outside from an objective and general point of view, as well as matters which are classified as confidential or confidential under political, military, diplomatic, economic, and social needs.

A person may be determined by the person (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do11441, Feb. 13, 2018). C University D Campus’s purchase of dormitory fixtures according to the “unit price contract for a third party” method under Article 5(1) of the Public Procurement Act and Article 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.