Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

It shall not be readily concluded.

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

A prosecutor stated in the first sentence 5 to 6 of the charges charged in the indictment in the trial at the trial of the political party that “payment from 202 to 2004” means “payment from 2002 to 2004 between 12 years” and the fourth sentence “from 2002 to 2014” in the entirety of the fourth sentence, “Defendants have prepared a loan certificate as above and stated “from 2002 to 2004,” but D did not fit to set the changed period between 12 years.

The phrase “1” was written on the second “04,” the second “04,” which was already written to read “1,” and was changed to “2014,” and the loan certificate was drawn up as “12 years to 2002 to 2014.”

"Application for Amendments to Bill of Indictment" was filed, and this Court permitted the amendment, and the subject of the adjudication was changed.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

However, although there are grounds for reversal of authority above, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and the legal doctrine, the Defendant could fully recognize the fact that the Defendant had intention to make a false accusation as stated in the instant facts charged, and that the Defendant did not know D and E.

(1) D shall consistently lend the repayment period of KRW 10 million to an investigative agency and a defendant in the original instance.