2. After the confirmation of the defendant's case against C, the defendant recognized the crime of perjury in this case at the court below late after the confirmation of the defendant's case, and against the mistake, the defendant committed for C who is the husband, and the contents of the teacher's act are abstract and thus lacks criminal intent, the perjury in this case does not significantly affect the result of the trial of the defendant's case, and the fact that the defendant is the principal offender is favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of perjury in this case interferes with the court's trial for finding the substantial truth and thus it is necessary to strictly punish it. The contents of the perjury in this case are important as to the issues of the defendant case, and it is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background and consequence of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant’

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, the application of the written judgment of the court below is clear that "the choice of fine is omitted at the last time of "the corresponding provision of the Act on Criminal Procedure". Thus, the ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.

.