beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and imprisonment with prison labor for six months.
, however, the defendant.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A actually received two copies of a promissory note from H on August 15, 2009. As such, Defendant A did not have any evidence of perjury and Defendant A also abetted the perjury, or had no intention to commit the crime.
Nevertheless, the lower court found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged on the ground that it believed only the statements of H and G without credibility, and thus, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant B (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of an ex officio appeal, we examine the facts of all the facts charged by the prosecutor at the trial, and the issuance date of all of the facts of the facts in the facts charged to the prosecutor at the trial. The issuance of each one of the promissory notes with the issuer H at the face value of KRW 50 million and KRW 50 million at face value, and one of the promissory notes with the issuer H at the issue value of KRW 50 million at face value, and one of the promissory notes with the issuer H at the issue value of KRW 50 million at face value, KRW 1,000,000 at face value, KRW 50,000,000 at face value, issuer, and one of the promissorysory notes with H at face value, and KRW 1,000 (hereinafter the above Chapters 2, “each of the Promissory Notes in this case”). Since the court below's amendment to the indictment, it becomes no longer possible for the judgment below to be affirmed.
Although there is a ground for ex officio reversal, Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and then this is examined in the following.
3. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by Defendant A’s assertion of mistake or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, Defendant A’s criminal facts stated in the judgment below.