The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

1. The sentence of a fine of KRW 2 million imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

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

When a person who has committed perjury makes a confession before a judgment or disciplinary action on the said case becomes final and conclusive, the punishment shall be mitigated or exempted (Article 153 of the Criminal Act). This shall also apply to the crime of perjury (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do1820, May 11, 2006; 2010Do801, Apr. 15, 2010). Since there are no limitations under any Act or subordinate statute as to the procedure for confession, there are no limitations as to the above confessions, it is not only voluntary confession against the agencies dealing with the above cases, but also a confession by the court or investigation agency as the defendant or suspect of the said perjury case, and is also included in the concept of confession.

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the court below’s decision to return back to the instant case and based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the Defendant’s teacher, which was confirmed on February 7, 2018. The Defendant was present at the prosecutor’s office on January 5, 2018, and was investigated and led to the confession of the instant perjury (Evidence No. 252,253 of the Evidence Record), and the court below determined the punishment without any need to reduce or exempt the punishment against the Defendant under Article 153 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the court below’s decision is no longer maintained in this regard.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the following is again reversed after oral argument.