Thank you sincerely for leaving such heartfelt feedback. I want to emphasize that this is not just a copy-paste thank you; I am truly grateful that you took so much time and effort to leave such a long and detailed review. I believe that because you shared your detailed opinions despite being busy with exam preparation, I can develop the lecture in a better direction. As the instructor who created this course, I would like to address a few points regarding the production intent and learning direction. First, regarding the difficulty setting. The Information Processing Engineer practical exam is a test where the difficulty variance between sessions is quite significant. If the lecture is structured based on the most difficult sessions, it would essentially have to cover major-level content, which could actually increase the unnecessary learning burden on students. I judged that a strategy of boldly skipping questions that are disadvantageous to those without a development background—such as past Java thread or generics questions—is realistically effective. I still believe that it is entirely possible to secure 45–50 points just with the code examples I cover. Second, regarding the theory section. There are representative areas in theory that appear frequently, such as design patterns, database theory, cohesion, and coupling. Beyond those, it purely depends on the examiner's whim, so I believe the right direction is for me to provide as much information as possible in the study materials and for you to memorize them yourself. However, as you mentioned, I fully agree that the contextual explanation of 'why this concept is necessary' and 'how it is applied to actual problems' was lacking. I plan to supplement and upload this along with an improved version of the theory PDF, but I have a personal question: "Do students really need to study the reasoning behind theory and how it applies to problems just to pass?" This is because the theoretical scope of the Information Processing Engineer practical exam covers almost the entire computer science curriculum. In fact, I would love to discuss this using past exam questions. Thinking back through all past sessions, the theory questions that appeared outside of what I covered include things like Subnet Mask, Ad-hoc, OTP, VPN, and Smurfing... I am not even sure as an instructor if these are areas that can be answered correctly just by listening to more meticulous explanations. On a personal note, I actually tell the students I teach offline not to look at textbooks like 'Su-Je-Bi.' This is because they include every single nonsensical, detailed theory or word that is highly unlikely to appear on the exam. I believe that actually wastes time and hinders learning effectiveness. Additionally, there seems to be a misunderstanding, but passing in one week is not a matter of terminology; it is actually possible. It is not a matter of talent, but a matter of skill. The reason I say it is possible is that I have helped many such students pass. Based on a non-major with zero base, thinking that you need to prepare for 3 months to pass means the learning direction is wrong. I can confidently help a non-major office worker pass in one month, with time to spare. This is especially true because the theory in the Information Processing Engineer practical exam often provides options almost like a multiple-choice test. (Of course, a few purely subjective questions do appear.) I sincerely apologize once again for failing to fully meet your expectations when you took this course with high hopes while preparing for a difficult exam. Please feel free to leave any questions you have during the remainder of your preparation, and I will do my best to answer them. I am sincerely rooting for your success.