The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not receive from G the cancellation documents necessary to implement the procedure for cancellation registration of the second-class collateral security, which was established on five parcels, including the forest and fields in Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-gun, and that there was only a fact that the Defendant introduced G to W of the office of a certified judicial scrivener who frequently traded with I working

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, since the defendant appeared as a witness in the Cheongju District Court 2013Kahap26019 and testified to the above purport is not against memory.

2. The Defendant testified to the effect that, around December 12, 2013, at the Cheongju District Court No. 229, the Cheongju District Court No. 229, Cheongju District Court No. 51, Cheongju-ro, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Cheongju-gu, Cheongju-ro, 201, in order to seek damages of KRW 120 million against the No. 20,000, the Defendant was present and take an oath as a witness in the lawsuit No. 26019, the Cheongju District Court No. 2013, 2013, stating that “No fact was received from G documents for cancellation of the second-class collective security established on five parcels, such as Jincheon-gun, Seo-gu, Seo-gu,

However, around May 2010, the Defendant received from Cheongju-si H a document cancellation of the right to collateral security from G and transferred it to a certified judicial scrivener's J office.

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

3. Determination

가. 원심의 판단 원심은, ‘농협은행 대출을 위해 필요하니 이 사건 근저당권 말소서류를 가져오라는 피고인의 말을 듣고 2010. 5.경 피고인에게 말소서류를 건넸다’는 G의 진술은 수사기관 이래 일관될 뿐만 아니라 K이 피고인이 근무하는 장소에서 금융기관 추가대출을 언급한...