The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court (five months of imprisonment, one year and six months of suspended execution) against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable (the Defendant was put in place with C simply by internal relations with C).

In light of the fact that the defendant testified as stated in the facts charged, but it was argued that he did not intentionally perjury as stated in the facts charged. However, since the above assertion of mistake was explicitly withdrawn on the trial date of the first trial of the court of first instance, the above assertion cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal, and even if this is examined ex officio, the defendant led to confession in the court of original instance. In particular, the confession in the court of original instance is made under the assistance of a private counsel, and the confession in the court of original instance is made under the assistance of a private counsel, and there is no particular circumstance to suspect the credibility or credibility thereof, and in full view of each statement in the investigation agency of other related persons supporting the confession, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant had proved the above facts as stated in the facts charged even if the defendant did not organize internal relations with C, and thus, the judgment below erred by mistake as alleged by the defendant

2. On the other hand, the defendant's perjury does not appear to have a significant impact on the party's belief as a result of the trial of the case, and the defendant shows his attitude of recognizing and opposing his mistake, and the fact that the defendant has no record of punishment of the same kind or suspension of execution or more is favorable to the defendant.

However, perjury needs to be punished for a crime that undermines the trust in the national judicial system by impairing the discovery of substantial truth, and the contents of perjury in this case are not insignificant, and the process is relatively active, and other circumstances alleged by the defendant have already been asserted by the lower court.