However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On November 9, 2017, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the fraud case against the above court 2017 Godan1291B in the Incheon District Court 352, 129, Seocheon-si, Incheon District Court 352, which was 129, and was given testimony after being notified of the right to refuse to testify and being sworn.

The Defendant testified to the witness that the defense counsel of the foregoing case in the examination of witness "I asked that I would like to pay the witness the amount of KRW 40 million,00,000,000,000,000." The Defendant testified to the witness "I would like to ask I would like to "I would like to ask I would like to keep money on February 2, 2013 because I would like to lend I would like to trust money about this schedule, and I would like to suggest that C would give I would know that I would lend it."

However, the Defendant did not borrow KRW 40 million from C, and the Defendant, who was the Defendant of the said fraud case, borrowed KRW 40 million from C.

Accordingly, the defendant made a false statement contrary to his memory and raised perjury.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Protocol of examination of witness;

1. Copy of the judgment;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written confirmation of electronic financial transfer;

1. Relevant Article 152(1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. The argument that the defendant lent C money to C through the account of B, thus the defendant cannot be deemed to have made a false testimony contrary to his memory.

2. Inasmuch as the fact that a criminal judgment already became final and conclusive on the same factual basis of the judgment is a flexible evidence, the fact that the judgment is contrary to the fact cannot be recognized unless there are special circumstances where it is deemed difficult to adopt the factual judgment of the relevant criminal trial.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do11349 Decided December 24, 2009, etc.).