Thus, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case that the defendant made a false statement contrary to his memory, although the defendant stated that he had experienced at the time. However, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. First, we examine whether the Defendant’s testimony of this case goes against objective facts, and according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the Defendant’s husband C was shakingd by d’s flab with flabs, while D and Sinb on October 1, 2014, and the Defendant’s husband C was flabed by flabing D’s flab with D, and then C was flabed with flabs. However, the Defendant’s testimony of this case is a testimony contrary to objective facts, since it can be acknowledged that the Defendant’s flab was not leading D.

B. Next, according to the records of this case, even though the defendant's testimony of this case is false or false in violation of memory, it cannot be ruled out that the defendant could not see some of the circumstances that were yellow or frighted at the time, the defendant's above testimony distort facts conclusively by based on a very subjective opinion, and it is reasonable to view that the defendant's testimony of this case was made a false statement contrary to memory because C testified testified about the judgment of the situation that he did not witness after ascertaining C's tear and its bid, and judged that C had been towed, and it was carried out.

In addition, the defendant's consistent position on the case is consistent until the trial is held.