위증
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant entered into a lease agreement on behalf of D with F with the deposit amount of KRW 21 million regarding the instant store on behalf of F, and was paid by F in full.
Therefore, the statement that the defendant stated as stated in the facts charged in the instant case is not false as against memory.
Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. In light of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the charges of this case on the ground that the Defendant made a false statement with the purport that the Defendant would be paid KRW 21 million, even though he merely leased the instant store to F with KRW 300,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 500,000,000, and that it was sufficiently recognized.
① From April 6, 2009 to April 30, 2009, when entering into a lease agreement with the Defendant around August 8, 2009, F and G actually paid KRW 8 million in cash over five to six occasions, the remainder was replaced by KRW 150,000 per month, and around August 8, 2010, the deposit was increased to KRW 21 million on September 2, 2010 and paid KRW 8 million on June 1, 2012. However, the period of the lease agreement was three months prior to the beginning of the lease agreement.
It is difficult to believe that the above assertion that the remaining security money has been paid at the time when the lease term expires or the remaining security money has been left behind is extremely rare.
② Rather, F prepared a lease contract of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 300,000,000, and obtained a fixed date at the tax office as of September 3, 2010, and the Defendant also filed a tax return based thereon.