A. Fact-finding (not guilty part of the reasoning of the lower judgment) The Defendant, in the prosecutorial investigation of the larceny criminal case against himself, brought about one copy of the detailed statement of the corporate account transaction in D owned by C, which was prepared and printed out by C.

In light of the above, if C sent the account transaction details to the Defendant by e-mail, the Defendant would not have any need to bring the corporate account transaction details in D office, and the Defendant’s and C’s e-mail transmission details remain in all other e-mail transmission details. However, in full view of the following: (a) around July 2014, the Defendant did not have any record of sending the account transaction details by e-mail from C to e-mail; and (b) the Defendant did not have any record of sending the account details by e-mail.

However, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged on the sole basis of the statements of the Defendant and C without credibility. In so doing, the lower court erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unfluent and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Examining the evidence of this case as to the assertion of mistake of fact in detail, the court below, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, proved that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone that the defendant's statement in this part of the facts charged is false testimony contrary to memory is beyond reasonable doubt.

It is not sufficient to see that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the action that acquitted this part of the facts charged is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. Even after the conviction against larceny became final and conclusive, the Defendant appears to have expressed a statement of perjury, and the attitude of denying the crime.