A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On October 5, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on March 8, 2017, which was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months, and the judgment was finalized on March 8, 2017 (hereinafter “the first judgment”). On April 17, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny, etc. and was finally decided on September 21, 2018 (hereinafter “the second judgment”).

In addition, the prosecutor brought and maintained the prosecution to the effect that the crime of perjury of this case is in the relationship of special larceny of the second judgment and the latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

However, since the facts constituting the crime of the second judgment were all conducted before the date of confirmation of the first judgment, each of the crimes of this case cannot be conducted together with the crimes of the second judgment.

Therefore, each of the crimes of this case is not the relation between the second judgment and the latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

In addition, since each of the crimes of this case was committed after the date when the first judgment became final and conclusive, the relationship between each of the crimes of the first judgment and the latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act does not exist.

Therefore, this decision did not explain the criminal records of the defendant, but did not include Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act in the applicable provisions of law.

On November 6, 2017, the Defendant asked D, a birther, who was aware of the Defendant’s house located in the Namyang-si of Gyeonggi-si, to whether he had committed a crime (special larceny) that was committed on or around May 2016 at the trial on getting off a siren K5 vehicle, or that he was exposed to a gold (special larceny). At that time, I would like to ask D, a birther, who was aware of the Defendant’s house located in the Republic of Korea, at the same time near the Defendant’s house located in the Gyeonggi-si, Namyang-si, the Defendant had been aware of it.”