위증
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In full view of the purport of the entire testimony of the defendant in the previous case, the facts found guilty as perjury in the original judgment, the contents of testimony of the witness I in the original judgment, and the supervisor's testimony in the previous case, concerning the part of innocence in the judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant, constitutes perjury in violation of memory in all the statements.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles as to perjury.
B. The lower court’s sentence (two million won of fine) imposed on the Defendant in relation to the convicted portion of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles
A. A. Around July 15, 2011, the Defendant was present at the court of Law No. 408, Nam-dong Incheon District Court of Law No. 408, Nam-gu, Incheon, Incheon, as a witness of a claim suit against the Incheon City of Law No. 2010Gahap2000 (hereinafter “D”).
On February 22, 2009, before the presiding judge of the above court where the defendant tried the above case, the plaintiff company used high-priced construction equipment, including Osacheon Construction Equipment, at the site of this case, and notified the plaintiff company that the plaintiff company should be aware of it as another place, and the defendant asked the plaintiff company to answer "(i)" not "I asked the plaintiff company that he should be aware of it as another place" (hereinafter "the plaintiff's statement"). After completion of the construction work, the defendant designated the original sabto in the site of the construction as the sabath in the defendant's jurisdiction for landscaping construction, and after completion of the construction work, he was planned to bring it back again at the sabathy site of the construction site, and after completion of the construction work, he did not "the question of "."