The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there was a testimony in court as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment of the defendant, such testimony constitutes a subjective evaluation or a statement of opinion on legal effect, or where the whole testimony is judged as a whole, the whole purport of the testimony is consistent with objective facts, and is not a statement contrary to the defendant's memory.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case and erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on perjury, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (amounting to 6 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles refers to the statement that a witness makes a false statement against his memory. Whether a false statement is contrary to his memory or not is a false statement shall be judged by understanding the whole of the testimony made during the relevant interrogation procedure as a whole, not a simple section of the testimony. However, where the meaning of the testimony is unclear or diverse, the determination of whether the testimony is false after clarifying its meaning by taking into account the ordinary meaning and usage of language, the context before and after the testimony at issue was made, the purpose of the newspaper, and the circumstances leading up to the testimony (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do12586, Mar. 15, 2012). 2) In full view of the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below based on the above legal principles, the Defendant’s testimony stated in the judgment is not only against the objective facts, but also against his memory, and thus, it is justified to acknowledge the Defendant as guilty of the facts charged in this case.