(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.10.22 2014노1503 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.10.22 2014노1503

위증

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (in fact-finding, misunderstanding of legal principles, and unreasonable sentencing)

A. In light of the fact that the Defendant did not have inflicted any injury on C’s East F, and instead did not unilaterally assault C’s East F and suffered any injury by 4 weeks, the Defendant was guilty of the facts charged in the instant case without having been present at the Daejeon District Court on March 18, 2013 as a witness of the injury case against C, Daejeon District Court Decision 2012DaMa718, 2013, and made a false statement contrary to memory, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case.

B. M&D misunderstanding of the legal doctrine that the Defendant inflicted an injury on F.

Even if the testimony of the defendant is related to the right to refuse self-incrimination, the defendant's testimony constitutes abuse of public prosecution right, and perjury cannot be punished due to the lack of the criminal intent or expectation of perjury.

C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (the fine of KRW 3,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The key point in finding the guilty of the charge of this case is whether the defendant has made a false statement contrary to memory despite the fact that the defendant inflicted an injury on the F, and in full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant injured F, and even if the defendant is aware of such facts, the defendant can be admitted that he made a false statement in court. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is rejected.

1 F is relatively specific and consistent that the Defendant, from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, expressed his motive to Nice C and expressed his behavior to his children, and the horse "this would be spath, governance, spathn will not be superior," and the body part is tightly and consistently.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 2014.10.29 2013노989

-울산지방법원 2015.07.10 2015노409

-춘천지방법원 2019.01.18 2018노228

-서울남부지방법원 2013.12.12 2012노1257

-대구지방법원 2016.04.29 2015노2302