The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.

A. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of part of the facts charged in this case on a different premise that the prosecutor (i.e., mistake of facts as to the acquitted portion) did not require the defendant to prepare a letter of delegation of payment, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Shebly, the lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The Defendant (misunderstanding of facts as to the part of the crime) was investigated by the prosecution on September 24, 2012 on the instant case, and the confession did not lack voluntariness, and there was no reinforcement evidence as to the confession. Rather, according to the remaining evidence, the Defendant could be aware that he faithfully testified according to his memory at the time of the testimony, so the Defendant was acquitted of each of the facts charged of the instant case. However, the lower court, which found the Defendant guilty of perjury under different premise, erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. A. Around 15:00 on August 25, 201, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case was present at the court of Busan High Court No. 401, the Busan High Court of Law No. 2011Na1095, the Plaintiff D, and the Defendant E, to take an oath.