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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On June 19, 2013, around 11:30 on June 19, 2013, the Defendant appeared and taken an oath as a witness of the Daejeon District Court Hongsung Branch Branch 213, which is located in Hongsung-gun, Hongsung-gun, Hongsung-gun, Hongsung, as a witness for the infringement of the effect of compulsory execution to real estate against the above court No. 2013 High Court No.

The Defendant testified that “The father of the Defendant (C) has prepared a written application for the above discussion to be recognized as the above real estate, but the witness testified that “I may know it well.”

However, in fact, the defendant submitted a copy of the application for the above debate to the above court directly as evidence in relation to civil litigation, such as Hongsung Branch of Daejeon District Court 2008Gadan375, the delivery of land by his father D, so C was aware that his father submitted the above debate.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first protocol of trial;

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of some police officers against the defendant;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. A copy of the judgment of Hongsung Branch of the Daejeon District Court 2008Gadan375, a copy of the register of permission of the person in question, a copy of the protocol of examination of witness, a copy of the protocol of examination of witness, a copy of the protocol of examination of witness oath, and a copy of the application of statutes applicable to the above

1. Relevant Article 152 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Partial reduction of fines prescribed in a summary order by taking into account the following circumstances, i.e., the reasoning for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the background of the instant case, the Defendant’s testimony appears not to have a significant impact on the substantive judgment of the case indicated in the judgment, and the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment. The following circumstances acknowledged by the records of the instant case’s judgment on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion, namely, the Defendant