logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2019.09.19 2019고단1339
위증
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 8,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

At around 16:30 on February 28, 2019, the Defendant appeared and taken an oath of the instant case (Plaintiff B) and the instant case (Plaintiff C) of the revocation of the revocation of the reprimand (2018Guhap3924), located in Seoju District Court No. 524, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Busan, 524, the Defendant asked the head of the team to answer the question “I failed to report (that D’s camping site is operated without permission for diversion of farmland)” that “I reported to B” of the Plaintiff’s agent’s “I would like to answer to the question that D’s camping site was unregistered and did not obtain permission for diversion of farmland”, and finally, the Defendant asked the head of the team that “I asked the question whether I will continue to answer the question “I”.

However, the defendant, around April 2015, examined the operational status of the above camping site and reported to C and B on the fact that the above camping site is operated without permission for diversion of farmland, and C and B were well aware of this fact.

Accordingly, the defendant gave false testimony contrary to his memory and raised perjury.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of each pleading;

1. Protocols of examination of witnesses;

1. Each judgment;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on determination of each petition;

1. Article 152 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines concerning the crime;

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

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act are recognized as crimes of reasons for sentencing, the primary offender who has no record of criminal punishment, the fact that the defendant did not appear to have taken to commit the instant crime to obtain unjust profits, and the fact that the defendant's perjury seems not to cause serious obstacles to the discovery of substantial truth, and thus, is more favorable.

arrow