I did not hold L's house.

In the newspaper "I reverses the statement, which is appropriate for any one," "I have provided meals like four persons, but L married couple went to the house, and I have taken the house, and the witness and I also left the house.

“The Defendant’s testimony” is deemed to be “the Defendant, after having performed L with meals on January 8, 2013,” and the Defendant’s statement as above constitutes a false testimony contrary to memory, even though he/she had performed L with meals on January 8, 2013, even though he/she had a fact between L and L’s house, constitutes a false testimony contrary to memory.

Although the Defendant appeared to give L with an envelope containing three million won in cash, the Defendant made a false statement contrary to memory, as stated in this part of the facts charged, and presented perjury.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated, found the facts and circumstances as stated in its reasoning, and comprehensively considered such facts and circumstances, the Defendant’s testimony does not appear at L’s house on January 8, 2013, but rather between I and L’s house.

It is reasonable to interpret that the testimony is not between the L couple and the Defendant’s above testimony is not sufficient to recognize that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is a false statement contrary to the Defendant’s memory, and the Defendant’s testimony cannot be deemed to constitute perjury.

In light of the facts charged, the lower court acquitted the instant charges.

The court below's reasoning and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below.