beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although there has been a misunderstanding of facts by C upon C’s request, it has been believed that C should not be accompanied any longer after C came to be aware of the malicious form, and all the facts of perjury have been led to the confession of C. The defendant did not have any reason to prove any other facts in the confession of the fact of perjury, and merely denied it in a manner that is not unrelated to C, and did not make a statement intentionally of perjury, the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. (1) When determining whether a witness’s testimony in perjury is a false statement contrary to his memory, the whole testimony during the relevant interrogation procedure should be grasped as a whole, not a simple Section of the witness’s testimony, and where the meaning of testimony can be understood either in itself or in a multilateral way, the ordinary meaning and usage of the language, the context before and after the testimony in question was made, the purpose of the examination, the circumstance during which the testimony was made, etc. should be determined clearly, and then the meaning of the testimony should be determined by making it clear, in full view of the following:
(2) On September 20, 2007, the defendant asked questions to the counsel in the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2012Kadan752 regarding the issue of whether or not the witness is issued with respect to injury to the hospital" and asked questions to the counsel in the Seoul Western District Court Decision 201Da752 regarding the issue of this case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do9590, Sept. 20, 200). (2) The defendant answer that "the witness does not have any fact between the hospital" differently from the facts.