[Criminal Records] The Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor and two years and six months in Seoul Eastern District Court on September 29, 2017, and the above judgment was finalized on September 29, 2017

[2] On May 25, 2017, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the Seoul Eastern District Court No. 304, Seoul Eastern District Court No. 301, which was located in Songpa-gu Seoul District Court, on May 25, 201, and took an oath. The Defendant, upon opening several accounts under the name of the corporation C, conspired with C to transfer the access media to a third party. However, the witness of the prosecutor, in collusion with C, distributed the passbooks, check cards, etc. of the accounts in the name of D, E, and F, in collusion with C.

“C is believed to believe Na and to be responsible for the management of the account under the name of the corporation,” and C was unaware of the fact that it would display a third party access medium, and C would transfer an access medium to a third party.

The testimony was made to the effect that “.........”

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

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

1. The list of evidence 457 high-ranking 2017 high-ranking 457 high-ranking 2017 high-ranking 457 high-ranking 457 high-ranking 2017 high-ranking 7,7,8, and nine public trial records, and

1. Protocol of examination of the witness, and judgment of high court 457;

1. Requests and replies to each information on financial transactions (G banks, H banks, I banks, J banks, K banks, and L banks);

1. Search of Supreme Court Decisions 2017No937, 2010;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of inquiries about criminal history and the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning personal confinement;

1. Article 152 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act on the treatment of concurrent crimes: Provided, That an offense related to the perjury of the reason for sentencing under Article 39(1) requires strict measures as it is highly likely to seriously undermine the judicial functions of the State.

The defendant makes a false inquiry about the core contents of the facts charged.