All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants with respect to the summary of the grounds for appeal (2 million won by each fine) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendants recognized and reflected the instant crime, and led to the confession of the F prior to the final determination of the judgment on the forgery of private document.

In addition, the Defendants’ crime of this case does not seem to have affected the conclusion of the judgment on the forgery of the private document.

However, perjury is an offense that obstructs 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. Defendant B has a record of criminal punishment once a fine is imposed due to a double crime, Defendant C has a record of criminal punishment twice a fine due to a double crime.

In addition, the lower court seems to have determined the sentence by fully considering the favorable circumstances of the Defendants, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court because new sentencing data have not been submitted at the appellate court.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the Defendants’ age, sex, family environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the situation before and after the crime, it does not seem that the punishment determined by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. The Defendants’ appeal is without merit and thus dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.