A. Although the Defendant did not commit the instant crime, the lower court convicted the Defendant of all the instant facts charged by reliance on the statements made by G, E, F, and B without credibility. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the overall sentencing conditions of the instant case, the lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In full view of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant’s case of the agreed amount (Seoul Western District Court 2014Da35078) (hereinafter “relevant agreed amount case”) by the Seoul Western District Court 2014Ga35078.

1) The Defendant’s testimony at the public prosecutor’s office and the lower court made a false testimony to the effect that he/she was not aware of the agreement money set up between the Defendant and E on April 3, 2015, and testified to the effect that he/she was not aware of the agreement money set up between the Defendant and E, and that he/she made a false statement contrary to his/her memory. As to the circumstances leading up to the above testimony, the Defendant made a request for assistance while having sexual assault upon E. Around March 2015, the Defendant made a specific statement that he/she directly met the Defendant, or constantly received the above certificate by telephone. Once the trial record 164-167, the list of evidence submitted by the public prosecutor (No. 188-198 pages) No. 12 (No. 188-198) of the summary order issued on March 26, 2016 on the ground that he/she made a false testimony contrary to his/her memory in the relevant agreement money.