The defendant shall be innocent.

A. Fact-misunderstanding Defendant “A female instructor of this Gwangju metropolitan area.”

It is not known that the E and F recommended investment.

“To this example,” the attorney’s question.

The answer to "" is unclear as to whether the defendant itself is a false fact, and it is difficult to view that the defendant made a statement in the court with the recognition that such content itself is a false fact, and therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Around March 25, 2014, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the Gwangju District Court No. 402 located in Busan Dong-dong, Gwangju District Court Decision 1735, 2013 high order 2013 high order 204 high group 204 high order 204 high order 2044 high order 204.

The above case is a fraudulent case with the purport that D and C conspired with several victims to “to pay a considerable amount of profit if they make an investment because they have good investment sources.” D and C are responsible for each other, and the defendant was present at the above court as a witness of C.

As above, the defendant was present in the court and testified after oath. D was a student of Gwangju.

E and F have not been recommended to make an investment, “D-U.S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S.S.E

It is not known that the E and F recommended investment.

“To this example,” the attorney’s question.

The answer to “ was made by making a false statement contrary to memory” and perjury.

3. The lower court determined that the Defendant: (a) talked to the effect that C was engaged in telephone conversations with F and gave C an investment solicitation repeated by F; (b) however, according to the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court, C and D are invested in other victims.