Guilty of perjury, not guilty of teacher...Legal circles are divided over the unusual ruling.

[Anchor]
As the court judges that perjury is guilty and perjury teachers are not guilty, interpretations are divided in the legal world.

From the interpretation that it is a strict view of words that can be interpreted arbitrarily, some say that it is difficult to understand that only perjury people are punished.

Reporter Kwon Junsu reports.

[Reporter]
In September last year, the court rejected the arrest warrant for CEO Lee Jae-myung, but said the allegations of perjury teachers appear to be cleared.

On top of that, as Kim Jin-sung confessed to perjury, there were many observations that CEO Lee would also be convicted.

Legal experts say that the judgment may be different as the hearing on the warrant and the hearing on the merits cannot be simply compared, but
There are various evaluations of the judgment that those who perjured
are guilty and those who teach are not guilty.

A judge-turned-lawyer evaluated that whether he ordered false testimony is a subjective area and that acquittal is justified as there was no solid evidence.

As there is no specific circumstance of representative Lee's instructions, it is a strict interpretation of words that can be interpreted arbitrarily.

On the contrary, there are criticisms that it suggested a way to escape the suspicion of perjury, such as not expressing straightforwardly.

The court did not make a separate judgment on the circumstances or background of Kim's perjury,
Regarding
as well, some say that it is questionable to judge that the intention is not recognized, with only CEO Lee benefiting from perjury.

There are also observations that the judgment of the appeals court may change as the evaluation is mixed in the legal profession.

I'm YTN Kwon Junsu.

Edit the
video; Yongjun Yoon
Design; Lee Ga-eun