beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. On July 8, 2015, the Defendant was present at the court of Incheon District Court 322 located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Incheon, as a witness of the case, such as violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against E (a indecent act, such as a minor deceptive scheme, etc. under the age of 13) and gave a testimony after his/her testimony.
Defendant testified from F to the effect that “The words “I am not true, and I am am yeast, so this case became serious now,” the Defendant testified to the effect that I would like to read “I am yeast.”
However, in fact, F did not know the above facts to the defendant.
Accordingly, the defendant made a false statement contrary to his memory and raised perjury.
2. The issues of the criminal case against the judgment E were related to whether the defendant, the head of the Taekwondo field, committed the indecent act against the F of the victimized female student. However, considering the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the fact that the defendant made a statement to the effect that "at the time of the call, the victim made the statement that "at the time of the call, the victim made the statement that "at the time of the call, the victim made the statement that "at the time of the call, it was true that the victim made the statement that "at the time of the call, this case was serious", and this case was not a exaggeration or false report," and that it was doubtful that the victimized female student was not a exaggeration or false report.
However, whether the testimony of a witness in perjury is a false statement contrary to memory or not shall be determined by understanding the whole testimony during the relevant examination procedure as a whole, not by the simple Section of the testimony. Even if the whole purport of the testimony is consistent with objective facts and it is inconsistent with memory as to the small portion of the witness’s death, if it is caused by an injury or mistake to the purpose of examination (see Supreme Court Decision 196Da320, Mar. 3, 1996).