The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Inasmuch as the fact that misunderstanding of facts F made a statement to the effect that the Defendant “Misra” was “Misra,” the Defendant’s testimony, such as the description in the facts charged, was not false, the lower court erred by misapprehending the misunderstanding of the F’s belief that the testimony was not reliable, thereby convicting the Defendant

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (7 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant also asserted that the above grounds for appeal were identical to those of the above grounds for appeal, and the lower court rejected the above assertion on the grounds of the circumstances stated in its reasoning.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, the lower court asserted that: (a) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Da6844 decided July 16, 2014; (b) the 2014No2835 decided October 2, 2014; and (c) the perjury’s accusation against the Defendant, as indicated in the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Da9797 decided June 4, 2015, the Defendant and C stated that “the Defendant entered the Defendant”; (c) all of the above cases were rejected, and the Defendant and C were finally convicted and finalized; and (d) the Defendant, upon being examined in the relevant case, did not constitute a violation of the Act on Punishment of Violence, Etc., with the permission or consent obtained from the Defendant entering the building in the process of the instant case (Evidence evidence).