The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, expressed a desire to take care of the police officer F, the Defendant, who was dispatched to the court below, there is no fact that the face of the above police officer was taken.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (hereinafter referred to as a fine of four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts: (i) the police officer F's statement from the investigative agency of the police officer F, who is the victim police officer who corresponds to the facts charged, to the court of the court below, to the court of the court below, is considerably detailed and consistent; (ii) it is difficult to view the above police officer as having made a false statement to gather the defendant until he is punished for perjury; and (iii) there is no reason or motive for the above police officer to make a false statement; and (iv) the defendant changed from the court of the court of the court to the court of the court of the trial to the court of the trial, to the effect that "at the time of the above police officer's appearance," but at the time of the police investigation, the court below's determination on this part of the facts charged is just and justifiable in receiving the report from the police officer in a way that it is difficult for the police officer to believe that the above police officer's face was not consistent and thus, at the time of the police investigation.