(영문) 광주지방법원 2013.10.08 2013고단2924

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) 광주지방법원 2013.10.08 2013고단2924

위증

Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, 50.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On February 25, 2013, at the court of Gwangju District Court No. 302 of the Gwangju District Court, the Defendants took an oath as a witness of the case of injury to D (Seoul District Court No. 2012 High Court No. 2921). The Defendants testified that “D et al., after being in excess of D and E, they got in drinking together with E,” and they testified that “D et al., and they got in drinking together,” even though they did not have any drinking quality as E and D.

As a result, the Defendants made a false statement contrary to their memory and presented perjury.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Partial statement of the suspect interrogation protocol of the prosecution E;

1. Application of a copy of the examination of a witness (No. 61, 77 pages of investigation records), a copy of the judgment, and statutes;

1. The Defendants: Article 152 (1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

1. Defendants subject to confession and mitigation: Articles 153 and 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of detention in the workhouse: (a) in light of the fact that the reasons for sentencing under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act committed perjury with the intent to give testimony unfavorable to the accused prosecuted in another criminal case, it seems that the Defendants were in need of strict punishment against the Defendants; (b) the Defendants were punished twice by a fine, twice a suspended sentence, twice a suspended sentence; (c) Defendant B was punished by a fine, once a suspended sentence, once a suspended sentence; (d) there was no history of punishment for the same kind of crime; (e) there was no history of punishment for the Defendants; (e) there was no history of punishment for the same kind of crime; and (e) there was any objective material, such as CCTV images, which was recorded at the time, and thus the testimony of the Defendants would not affect the judgment of the original case; and (e) the motive, motive, and motive of the instant crime.

참조조문

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2014.05.12 2013고정3093

-서울남부지방법원 2014.12.05 2014노877

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2013.01.17 2012고단3325

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2014.01.16 2013고정1948

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2019.02.21 2017고단2475