beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.
Defendant
B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
except that this judgment.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1’s erroneous determination of facts only told Co-Defendant B that he had been detained, and did not instigate the perjury, and even if Defendant B said that “the testimony is made as stated by the police” was called “the testimony made by the police,” the statement at the police was made by the Busan District Court 2014Kadan6331 Injury case (hereinafter “injury Case”).
(2) Since it is consistent with the facts of the crime recognized in the above, it cannot be viewed as a perjury. 2) Even if the defendant misunderstanding legal principles instigated the perjury in the case of injury to B, it shall be deemed as a legitimate exercise of the right of defense as the defendant in the case of injury, so the crime of
3) The imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) against the Defendant of the lower judgment on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable. B. The imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant of the lower judgment is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The following facts and circumstances are acknowledged according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below and the court below as to each of the Defendant A’s respective arguments.
1. Co-defendant B, at the time of undergoing an investigation by the prosecution, stated that “I, at the time of inspection, sees “I, at the time of inspection, I am exactly and exactly am. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am to the police. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am.
In addition, a statement was made that “I will make a statement according to the police investigation” from A before one week prior to the crime of this case.
② The above statements in B were maintained as they were in the examination of the witness conducted in the court of the first instance, and their credibility is guaranteed in that they made a very rush statement in the attitude of a closed-day fence, despite the summary and repeated execution of Defendant A’s defense counsel over a long time.
(3) After the occurrence of the injury and the crime of this case, the Defendant shall do so for each week.