All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (four months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, and eight hours of social service) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The Defendants recognized each of the crimes of this case and are in profoundly contradictory to their depth, and the Defendants’ false testimony did not affect the outcome of the judgment on the violation of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.

Although the Defendants made a false testimony in the position of witness, they are also deemed to have committed each of the crimes in this case in the process of denying their crimes, since they are in the position of co-defendants in the case of violation of the Framework Act on Construction Industry.

However, perjury is an offense that undermines the proper exercise of judgment authority, which is the judicial action of the state, and the discovery of substantial truth, and requires a strict punishment corresponding thereto to the Defendants, and the defendants falsely testified is deemed to have been a major part in the case of violation of the Framework Act on Construction Industry in question;

The nature of the crime is very bad, such as aiding and abetting the crime of perjury.

In addition, the court below seems to have determined the punishment by reflecting most of the reasons for sentencing already asserted by the Defendants, and there is no special change in circumstances that can be considered in sentencing in the trial.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the court below is not deemed to be too minor or too unreasonable.

3. The appeal by the Defendants and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.