If the testimony was made as if the testimony was not well known and was well aware of the content of the testimony, the surname of perjury;

If the testimony made by the person who has taken an oath and made a statement was well aware of the fact of his/her testimony, and he/she is well aware of the fact of his/her testimony, the testimony is contrary to his/her memory and thus perjury is established.

Article 152 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 85Do868 Decided August 20, 1985

Defendant

Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 85No2561 delivered on December 17, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In full view of the evidence at the time of the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court below, there is no error of law by violating the rules of evidence in the judgment of the court below and failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations.

According to the facts established by the court below, since the defendant, after taking an oath by law three times, testified that he did not fit objective facts and did not know the fact that he was well aware of the contents of his testimony, the defendant's testimony will be a statement contrary to his memory, and perjury is established.

If a statement was made against memory, it does not affect the establishment of perjury even if it conforms to the truth, even if it was alleged as a result of the argument.

The court below did not err in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence or in the misapprehension of the legal principle of perjury, and there is only no error in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence or in the misapprehension of the legal principle of perjury.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Yoon-tae (Presiding Justice)