However, from the date of the conclusion of the judgment, each of the above two years against the Defendants.

Attached Form

The same shall apply to the facts charged.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A copy of each erroneous statement made against A and B;

1. A copy of the protocol of examination of witness to A as of June 19, 2014, copy of the protocol of examination of witness to B as of June 19, 2014, copy of the protocol of examination of witness to B as of September 16, 2014, copy of protocol of examination of witness to A as of September 16, 2014, copy of protocol of examination of witness to B as of October 10, 2013, copy of protocol of examination of witness to A as of October 10, 2013, copy of protocol of examination of witness to B as of October 10, 2013, and copy of protocol of examination of witness to E as of October 10, 2013.

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of an investigation report (report on telephone conversations between the victim and B), a copy of an investigation report (B, district units having jurisdiction over the dispatch of the scene of the case, and A

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and the Defendants’ choice of punishment: Articles 152(1) and 152(1) of the Criminal Act; the choice of imprisonment

1. Defendants from among concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act; and

1. Defendants on probation: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of a community service order: The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommending punishment] Type 1 (Perjury) basic area (six months to one year and six months) [no special person] [decision of sentence] perjury needs to be strictly punished by having the State exercise of judicial authority by making it difficult to discover truth through a trial difficult.

The defendants' first accused case against the F is not very good in light of the contents, circumstances, etc. of the testimony, such as the testimony of the original accused case against E, but the accused case against E has made a false statement by reversing the statement, and the second summoned witness examination date also makes a false statement at the same time.

However, the defendants are not consistent and contradictory to the arguments up to this court, and the defendants should be punished strictly.

However, as a result, the Defendants’ perjury did not affect the conclusion of the relevant case, and Defendant A has no penal power, and Defendant A has no penal power.