The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three months.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

According to Article 153 of the Criminal Act, when a person who has committed perjury under Article 152 of the same Act makes a confession or surrenders himself/herself before the judgment or disciplinary action on the relevant public case becomes final and conclusive, the relevant punishment shall be mitigated or exempted. As such, the confession prior to the final and conclusive judgment shall be stipulated as the grounds for the necessary mitigation or exemption. Since there are no restrictions on the procedures of confession under any Acts and subordinate statutes, confessions made by the court or suspect as the accused or suspect of the relevant perjury shall also be included in the concept of confession.

In light of the above legal principles, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant, as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, led to the confession of the facts that he instigated the above evidence to B at the time of being investigated by the prosecutor on November 29, 2017, which was before the criminal case of violation of the Vocational Stability Act was finalized, which was before the defendant's 2017 high order 2394 high order 201.

Therefore, even though the defendant denied the crime of perjury in the court below and withdrawn the confession, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the self-denunciation and confession of perjury, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, since the court below should have mitigated or exempted the defendant from punishment in accordance with Article 153 of the Criminal Act.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is again ruled as follows through pleading.

[Grounds for the judgment to be used again] Summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence