위증
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) brought D into the construction site of the commercial building site E (hereinafter “E site”) at the time of allowing D to use the materials remaining in the construction site of the building site of the Corporation F (hereinafter “C site”) from G, the representative director of the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), for the first time from G, the representative director of the F Co., Ltd., for the first time (hereinafter “F”), and as such, it is difficult to deem D’s statement to have such permission itself since it was after the time when it was accused of interference with business, and there is no credibility, and D’s statement is low, and D’s statement is highly likely to have been made favorable to D due to friendly relations, and the Defendant’s testimony was sufficiently reversed from the existing prosecutorial office’s testimony that “D is to the maximum extent possible” and there is no error in the misapprehension of its credibility, such as misconception of facts against the Defendant’s testimony.”
2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the lower court: (i) When G based on the statement of L, D, etc., it appears that the time when G instructed L to cooperate with D to use the materials remaining at D was around September 2012 (D) (it is deemed that D knew that it was about October 30, 2012 when the first statement was made in the lower court, and obtained permission from G to that effect on the E site or around October 20, 2012, after confirming that the delay in the year 2012 was around September 30, 2012, it was again confirmed that G was around September 30, 2012, and then stated that it was corrected from DF as a interference with business.