위증
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant rendered a true testimony because he or she had the draft written confirmation of facts, as stated by E.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. (1) In light of the spirit of the substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, unless there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or in view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional examination of evidence not later than the closing of argument in the appellate trial, maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly unfair, the appellate court should respect the determination on the credibility of the statement made
(2) On November 24, 2006, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by recognizing the credibility of E’s testimony and rejecting the credibility of C, R, etc. after directly examining E, C, and R, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do494, Nov. 24, 2006).
It does not seem to be significantly unfair to maintain its judgment as it is.
Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in E’s testimony, E did not know the contents of the claim made by D, and it can be recognized that the Defendant and C used the confirmation document prepared by the Defendant and C, without confirming the contents of the envelope, so the Defendant’s statement that he heard the horses of E and issued the confirmation document as it is is is deemed to be false.
Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.
B. In full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of the instant case of unfair sentencing, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.