All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, including each statement at the investigation agency of I and H with the gist of the grounds for appeal, and the facts that the above judgment became final and conclusive upon the sentence of a fine of two million won due to the crime of injury by Defendant A, and the facts that H received a summary order of a fine of two million won due to perjury, and that the above summary order became final and conclusive, Defendant A instigated H to give perjury a perjury in the case of injury by Defendant A, and sufficiently recognized the facts that Defendant B gave a perjury in the case of injury by Defendant A.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendants not guilty on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge this. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Summary of the facts charged

A. On December 30, 2013, the Defendant was tried on the street of “E” located in Busan Jung-gu, Busan, about December 22:30, 2013 to the effect that he injured F and G and damaged F’s cellular phone, Defendant A was an employee of the street store operated by the Defendant.

H had his mind to make a false testimony.

On September 25, 2014, around 14:40 on September 25, 2014, the Defendant: (a) from the Busan District Court No. 352, the Busan District Court located in the So-gu Busan District Court 352, “I would be allowed to enter the court to give testimony; (b) I would have known that I would have become aware of the fact that I would have come to the court, and had the court go

A request for testimony to the effect that “a request for testimony” was made to make a resolution to make a false testimony to H.

Accordingly, H was present at the court of Busan District Court No. 352, which was located in Busan Dong-gu, Busan, on September 25, 2014, according to the Defendant’s teacher’s teacher’s building on September 15, 2014, in the court of law No. 352, the above court of law No. 2014 and the Defendant No. 836, and the Defendant and F had physical contact after the witness’s arrival.

The prosecutor’s question “ has not been seen.”

The witness gives testimony as "," and "the witness fats the fat of G.