If there is a little error or inconsistency in the subjective evaluation based on experience facts or the statement of its legal effect, the sex of perjury

Perjury is established by a witness who has declared by law to state facts contrary to his/her memory. As long as he/she stated the fact that he/she is memory through experience, perjury is not established on the ground that there is a little error or inconsistency in the part that the statement is not in conformity with objective facts, or that there is a subjective evaluation based on the facts that he/she experienced, or the view

Article 152 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 80Do2019 Delivered on August 25, 1981

Defendant 1 and one other

Prosecutor (Defendant 1, 2)

Attorney Cho Han-chul, Jin-hun et al.

Jeonju District Court Decision 82No548 delivered on November 3, 1982

All appeals are dismissed.

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

Since perjury is established by a witness who has taken an oath under the law to state a fact contrary to his memory, so long as he stated a fact that is memory through his experience, perjury is not established on the ground that there is a little error or inconsistency in the part of the court below's decision that there is a subjective evaluation based on the facts that he did not meet or experienced an objective fact, or that there is a little error or inconsistency in its legal effect (see Supreme Court Decision 80Do2019, Aug. 25, 1981). Thus, although the expression of the court below is insufficient, the court below acquitted the defendant with the same purport. Such decision of the court below is just, and there is no error of law in the misapprehension of facts due to incomplete deliberation or violation of the rules of evidence

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)