All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On April 17, 2008, the Defendant testified that a stenography G copied the micro tape at the Stenographic Company office on the date and time and place stated in the facts charged, and testimony was made, and the aforementioned testimony was made in accordance with the memory of the Defendant, and does not constitute a false testimony.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that the defendant committed perjury is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. On April 17, 2008, the Defendant testified that he/she had taken an oath and testified at the date and place indicated in the facts charged, and had taken an oath in the office of Stenographic Company G on April 17, 2008, and the fact was a person who was unable

Therefore, there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts concerning the acquittal of the reasoning of the judgment below that acquitted this part of the facts charged.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. In perjury, a false notarial deed includes a case where a witness who has taken an oath has made a testimony that goes against his/her memory intentionally, and there is no relation with the establishment of perjury that has affected the conclusion of the trial and whether the said statement is the essential fact of the case in question.

(See Supreme Court Decision 80Do2783 Decided August 25, 1981, and Supreme Court Decision 2001Do5674 Decided December 11, 2001). Meanwhile, in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly erroneous, or it is highly unfair to maintain the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court, considering the result of the first instance court’s examination and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court until the closing of argument in the appellate trial.