The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is true that the Defendant responded to the prosecutor’s question, “B, when leasing the instant building, knew that the witness was a person engaging in sexual traffic,” such as the charge of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principle on the charge of not guilty (hereinafter “the charge”).

The prosecutor’s questioning is clear that “the purport of asking the defendant who has been engaged in sexual traffic in the past is to ask whether he was aware of the fact that he was a person who has been engaged in sexual traffic in the past,” and the defendant also knew of the purport of questioning. As such, perjury is established as long as the defendant made a false statement differently

Even if the prosecutor's question, like the judgment of the court below, is "the defendant was engaged in the sexual traffic business at that time, and whether the building of this case was aware of the fact that the building was leased for the purpose of sexual traffic B," and even if the defendant responded to this, the defendant also made a false statement differently from memory, and thus perjury is established.

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion

B. The lower court’s sentence (a fine of three million won) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Whether the testimony of 1 witness in a judgment of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is false or false shall be judged by understanding the whole of the testimony during the relevant examination procedure as a whole, rather than by the simple Section of the testimony in question. If the meaning of the testimony in question can be understood either in itself or in a multilateral way, the ordinary meaning and usage of language, the context before and after the testimony in question was made, the purpose of the newspaper, and the circumstances during which the testimony was made, and the meaning of the testimony in question shall be clearly defined.