except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 15, 2013, the defendant is pending in the appellate court after receiving the suspension of sentence for illegal action after receiving the acceptance of the bribery in the Daegu District Court resident support.

The Defendant, while serving as a public official in charge of D development projects, provided entertainment from F, a director of E, a tendering company of the said project, and informed G of the fact that he requested the recommendation of review committee members, etc., by advertising the fact that he was prosecuted for a crime of illegal disposal after accepting acceptance, etc., he had been tried for H to make a false testimony in order to receive favorable judgment.

Around April 2013, the Defendant made a statement to H, “B had already been aware of the fact that H had been recommended as an evaluation committee member recommendation agency G from the I. And since contact top was made by him, I would like to come up with him, and I would like to come up with him. Accordingly, if I made a statement, I would like to come up with it. I would like to say that H would make a statement top. I would like to say that “I would like to come up with it. I would like to come up with it. I would like to inform the Defendant of the fact that H made a request for recommendation as an evaluation committee member.”

On May 30, 2013, H attended and took an oath as a witness of the case, such as the crime of illegal action after acceptance of the bribe, at the Daegu District Court resident support No. 1 located in Mansan-dong at the time of stay in the Dong of Mansan-dong on May 30, 2013, H asked the prosecutor's answer "I do not ask the defendant about the fact that the witness knew that he requested the recommendation of the examiner as G around January 7, 2012," and answer to the question "However, the statement was made by the party to whom the recommendation was made (the phone was asked by the recommending agency to go back to G)".

Accordingly, the defendant is false against H's memory.