G The representative H applied for a pre-use inspection for the viewing of Gwangju after completing the construction work on April 2010 by the I Co., Ltd. (Representative J), the contractor of the above construction, but as a result of a field investigation, the design defect was pointed out, such as non-establishment of the fire zone A like A, and excess of the building-to-land ratio C Dong underground floor.

As a result, the G representative H testified to the effect that it was carried out at will differently from the design of the construction owner and the contractor in a civil lawsuit between the construction owner and the contractor, and was prosecuted for perjury. In the perjury criminal trial against H, the Defendant was guilty of false testimony as if the J, the representative of the construction for H had been carried out at will differently from the design drawing.

On July 22, 2014, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the above court 2013 High Court No. 2860 decided as a witness of the perjury case against H, 2013 High Court No. 2860 decided July 22, 2014, and gave a false testimony against memory.

A. The Defendant instructed Defendant H to prepare a plan that reflects the present state of construction in order to verify whether the construction cost requested by the contractor is appropriate, and the witness testified as “for example,” to the attorney’s inquiry of the defense counsel that “a summary known of such fact,” and testified as “for example, Defendant H testified as “for example,” to the attorney’s inquiry that “I prepared a plan on January 12, 2010 and reported it to the project owner,” and “after reporting the present state of the construction cost on January 12, 2010 to the project owner, it was sent to the JJ, which is the contractor.”