The appeal filed by the prosecutor, the defendant A, and B shall be dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the prosecutor's evidence (misunderstanding of facts against Defendant D), the fact that Defendant D instigated the perjury to Defendant A, B, and C is recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, as it found the Defendant not guilty.

B. Defendant A and B (unfair form of punishment) sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (a fine of one million won for each of the Defendants) are too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (i) In a criminal trial of a prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts, the recognition of facts must be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes the judge not more likely to have any reasonable doubt, and thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the degree to have the aforementioned conviction, the determination shall be based on the defendant’s interest even if there is a suspicion of guilt.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do774 Decided November 29, 2007, Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14487 Decided April 28, 201, etc.). Sheshed the lower court: (a) Sheshe argued that the Defendant had not given a false testimony to himself/herself; (b) Shed said that the Defendant could have given a false testimony to himself/herself; and (c) Shedd said that the Defendant had talked about the Defendant’s first visit at the Defendant’s counsel’s office; and (d) the Defendant had talked that “A would have become a witness at the time of his/her initial visit to the Defendant’s counsel; and (e) the Defendant had the said counsel asked the Defendant at the second visit of his/her defense counsel; and (e) caused the Defendant to make a statement different from the facts; and (e) it is difficult to recognize that the said circumstance alone prevents the Defendant’s testimony that he/she had caused the Defendant to give a false testimony to B before his/her testimony.