A. The Defendant of mistake of facts did not have made a false statement contrary to memory by attending as a witness of the instant case No. 2012 High Court Order 2279 (hereinafter “instant criminal procedure”), and even though the content of the Defendant’s testimony is consistent with objective truth, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the following facts or circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant may sufficiently be recognized as having made a false statement contrary to his memory as to the facts that the amount received from the Dfriendly Council exceeds KRW 1270,000,00 as a witness in the instant criminal procedure and that the amount received from the Dfriendly Council exceeds KRW 1270,000,000.

① The instant criminal procedure pertains to the facts charged that C had not filed a false accusation of embezzlement against the former president, and whether “E has embezzled a bicycle donated by the Defendant while in office as the president was purchased from the Defendant as if he purchased the bicycle from the Defendant.”

② The content of the testimony made by the Defendant in the instant criminal procedure was very important in determining “E’s embezzlement” and “C’s accusation.” The Defendant appeared as a witness of C in the instant criminal procedure. As such, it seems that he was well aware of the issues of the instant criminal procedure and the importance of testimony.

③ The Defendant appears as a witness in the instant criminal procedure, and “the money that he/she has received by selling bicycles to Daehan is 1,270,000 won, and he/she has a passbook.