Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

However, the period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. Defendant (misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of sentencing) was unaware of the fact that E prepared a statement of slandering the Defendant at the time of testimony written in the instant facts charged, so the aforementioned testimony does not go against the Defendant’s memory (misunderstanding of fact). The lower court’s sentence (one year of suspension of execution of a punishment amounting to KRW 500,000) is so unfair as to be too unreasonable (hereinafter “unfair sentencing”). B. The lower court’s sentence (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant and prosecutor prior to the determination of each of the grounds for appeal.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court determined that “A witness (the Defendant of this case) is not aware of the fact that E first puts his writing on a basic daily supply and demand for the witness, and that E first does not know the fact that he puts his writing on a sexual traffic with a foreign country,” and there is no reason for E to do so.

At present, I answer to the question of "I am fly fly, by making a speech at the bar," and 2. "I am fly, I am a fly with a witness bulletin board for the first time by specifying "I amfly, I amfly, I am to do a fry, I amfly, I am to am

I written a letter that he/she committed the above act and committed the commercial sex acts overseas, and what is the reason why he/she filed the complaint by affixing only the defendant's seal without filing a complaint.

“I have no time to answer the question of “E”.

The answer to the question of Defendant (C) and the question of Defendant (C) is that “I have no fact at all to ask the question of the presiding judge’s “I have posted the words similar to those written by Defendant (C).”

N. E also complained of its complaint

4. If so, why she asked Defendant (C) of this case, is the same as why she asked her questions.

The defendant may be aware of the questions of the presiding judge "....."

The reason why it can be.