Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of 5,000,000 won and by a fine of 1,00,000 won.

A. The judgment of the court below is too unreasonable due to Defendant A’s excessive sentencing (the grounds for appeal and reply of the defense counsel submitted after the lapse of the period for filing the appeal are determined within the scope of supplement in case of supplement of the grounds for appeal specified in the petition of appeal submitted by the defendant, and there is no separate judgment as to the assertion that is not written at all in the petition of appeal). (b) Defendant B, as a witness, made a false statement contrary to his memory, although Defendant B had not made a false statement contrary to his memory, the court below found Defendant B guilty of the facts charged.

2) The lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

(c)

The lower court’s sentencing against Defendant A by the Prosecutor is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the facts charged against Defendant A ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A.

피고인에 대한 이 사건 공소사실의 요지는, 피고인이 E에 대한 광주지방법원 순천지원 2013고 정 424호 폭력행위 등 처벌에 관한 법률위반( 공동 상해) 사건의 증인으로 출석하여 변호인의 “ 증인은 회사 동료인 F에게 오후 10:49 경에 전화를 한 사실도 있지요” 라는 질문과 “ 증인은 이에 대하여 피고인과 G이 싸우면서 뒹굴고 있는데 회사 동료가 생각이 나서 전화를 하였다고

No question is called "I testified" (the first testimony) and "I do not have the fact that I would like to receive an agreement from the defendant and then send the text messages to G."

‘The second testimony' (the second testimony). The prosecutor makes a false statement contrary to memory as if the defendant was in a place other than the scene at the time of the call to F, a company partner, even though he was in a place other than the scene at the time of the call.