The accused shall announce the summary of the judgment of innocence.

1. Around April 13, 2012, the summary of the facts charged was present at the court of Ulsan District Court No. 111 on April 14:15, 201, as a witness of the above court’s claim for construction cost between the Plaintiff E Co., Ltd. and Defendant F, and testified as follows.

The Defendant testified to the question that “A witness introduced a witness to the Defendant as a director of the Plaintiff Company,” and again, the Plaintiff’s agent testified that “A witness was an employee of the Plaintiff Company, without stating that he was an employee of the Plaintiff Company, and was introduced as an associated company.” In other words, the Plaintiff’s agent testified that “A witness was paid 35 million won from the Defendant on the grounds that he received 35 million won or more from the Defendant,” “The above 35 million won was paid as expenses, labor expenses, personnel expenses, construction expenses, goods expenses, etc. for 6-7 months from March to September.”

However, the facts indicate that the Defendant is named as “A director of the ECo., Ltd.” and was an employee of the ECo., Ltd., and the F was trusted and remitted to the Defendant as the construction cost executed by the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”).

Accordingly, the defendant, as a witness who has taken an oath under the law, made a false statement contrary to his memory, and perjury.

2. The Defendant asserts that the testimony stated in the facts charged is not against memory for the following reasons. A.

The defendant has no memory to introduce himself as a director of E.

B. 35 million won received by the Defendant is irrelevant to the construction price of E, as it is received as the name of the Defendant for the interior works directly executed by the Defendant in connection with G construction works executed by E.

C. The construction cost of the above G was set at KRW 170 million, which exceeds KRW 139 million in the original quotation, and the reasons for this exceeds KRW 100,000,000 in the construction cost stated in the original quotation, which was conducted by E, out of estimated construction.