2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include the following: (a) the fact that the Defendant’s mistake was divided and reflected; (b) the fact that the Defendant’s perjury appears not to have any actual influence on the trial result; and (c) the fact that the Defendant served as a core part of the Defendant’s perjury and is serving in prison as the Defendant.

However, perjury is an offense that obstructs the proper exercise of judgment authority, which is the judicial action of the State, and the discovery of substantial truth, and requires punishment corresponding to it, and the defendant's role and participation in the case is at issue, the defendant denied the involvement of the defendant. The fact that there is a large possibility of criticism in terms of the motive and background of the crime, and that there was a substantial possibility of avoiding liability for perjury by refusing to testify is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant.

In full view of the circumstances before and after the crime of this case, the defendant's age, character and conduct, occupation and environment, and all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, the sentence imposed by the court below is deemed appropriate and is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.