The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal alleged as follows: (a) the Defendant testified to “D’s failure to pay attention to the F’s head,” even though reporting that D’s head was derived.”

2. On June 30, 2016, around 14:00, the Defendant appeared and testified as a witness of the case violating the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (joint injury) against Defendant C and D, the above court’s order 2016 High Court Decision 349 High Court Decision 4, Seoul East-gu, Seoul, Seoul, as well as the above court’s order.

사실은 2015. 9. 19. 09:00 경 하남시 E 소재 주차장에서 C는 주먹으로 F의 얼굴을 1회 때리고 발을 걸어 넘어뜨린 후 넘어진 F의 머리 부분을 약 3회 걷어찼고, D은 C의 폭행을 피하기 위해 자신의 뒤로 오던

F의 머리 부위를 발로 1회 찼으며, 그로 인하여 F은 약 30일 간의 치료를 요하는 치아 완전 탈구 등의 상해를 입은 사실이 있었다.

Nevertheless, the prosecutor's "it is essential that the defendant F was at the time of the process."

In addition, Defendant D also did not appear to have continued to be attached to Defendant D’s side with respect to the question of “I’t know that Defendant D also was F at the time.”

”라고 대답하고, “ 피해자는 ‘ 맞다가 넘어졌고, 맞다가 밀려서 D의 뒤로 가니까 D이 머리를 발로 찼다’ 고 진술하였는데, 그런 사실이 없는 가요” 라는 질문에 대하여 “ 예, 그런 사실이 없습니다

The answer is called “,” and is required to determine whether the witness has not been a witness.

In respect of the question of whether or not there is no fact, I continue to attach to Defendant D’s side, but did not see it.

“The answer is that “the memory is not known and is not clearly known.”

The answer was made to the question "I am not to say".

In this respect, the defendant made a false statement contrary to memory, thereby committing perjury.

3. The lower court determined as follows, which can be recognized by the evidence of the lower court, namely, the following circumstances.