On June 19, 2017, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the Daegu District Court No. 5, Daegu District Court No. 2016, Daegu District Court No. 2016, 1709, and 1709, Defendant C, and 1, were to testify after being able to testify.

After the defendant took an oath as above, the defendant at the time of the case "at the time of the case, this situation (Assault) is entirely permanent address in relation to whether the defendant had observed the above joint assault case.

“In the inquiry of an attorney-at-law,” the site of assault was not deemed to have been committed.

“I testimony to the effect that, “I am, I am, I am on the face of violence between D C and C”.

I cannot see the prosecutor's question of "I actually face."

Although the Defendant responded to the purport that “,” but during the course of assaulting C and D’s attachment, the Defendant continued to appear at the scene of the assault and told the Defendant to fight.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the witness C, D, E, and F;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Each recording file and recording book [the defendant did not testify in a false manner; the above evidence can be comprehensively identified; ① the size of funeral hall G 306 at the time was small and narrow; ② the defendant, C, and D had a long reflect on the day of a long-standing radius; ② the voice was raised; ③ the physical conflict between C, H, and D occurred; ③ the extent of receiving paragraph (3) from the people referred to in subparagraph 305 who prepared for funeral in the next place, the defendant did not seem to have seen the scene of the assault between C and D at the time, even though he had sufficiently seen the scene of the assault between C and D.

It can be recognized that a statement against memory has been made.