The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Defendant

C.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the various sentencing conditions of Defendant A, the lower court’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C1’s erroneous determination of facts did not administer phiphones at the office of A on July 9, 201, and there was no fact that A administered phiphones. Thus, the testimony made to the same effect in the court of the case violating the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (compact) against A does not constitute a false statement contrary to Defendant’s memory. However, the lower court’s judgment that determined that the Defendant raised a perjury was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) In light of the various sentencing sentencing conditions of the instant case of unfair sentencing sentencing, the lower court’s imprisonment (four months) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. We examine the judgment of Defendant A. The crime of this case is a serious crime that causes confusion and incompetence in the state’s judicial action by impairing the court’s trial for discovering the truth, and there is a very serious need to punish Defendant A with severe weight of the nature of the crime. The Defendant’s crime of this case appears to have affected the conclusion of the relevant criminal trial, which is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant has been recognized as committing a perjury for the first time in the trial; (b) the Defendant has no record of punishment for the same kind of crime before committing the instant sonphone medication; (c) each crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive in all the criminal facts in the judgment; and (d) the need to consider equity in cases where judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act; and (e) other factors of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, family environment, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the

3. Determination as to Defendant C

A. The lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts was based on the overall evidence presented at the first instance court’s determination and based on the facts charged.