(a)a testimony that is contrary to the witness memory but consistent with objective facts and the gender of perjury;

(affirmative)

B. Where the testimony is unclear as to whether it goes against memory, perjury shall be established in cases where the whole purport is consistent with objective facts and only the extremely minor part is inconsistent with memory.

A. In perjury, perjury is established when a witness who has taken an oath makes a statement contrary to his/her memory against his/her memory, and even if his/her testimony conforms to objective facts, when he/she makes a statement contrary to his/her memory, it does not affect the establishment of perjury.

B. Where it is unclear whether the testimony goes against the witness memory, if the testimony conforms to the objective fact, it cannot be readily concluded that the testimony was made contrary to the memory unless there are circumstances of the special group. Moreover, even if the entire purport of the testimony is consistent with the objective fact and it is extremely small if it is not against memory, and it is found that it is a statement due to the scruption or mistake of the purpose of the examination, perjury cannot be established.

Article 152 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Attorney Im Il-young

Cheongju District Court Decision 79No550 delivered on December 5, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

The main contents of the facts charged in this case are that the defendant used to rent the Daegu Tyang store owned by his own person on the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay, and that he sold it to that person, and that at that time, the leased store was given to that person, and that at that time, the site site was known to that at that time the court below set up the evidences, and that the testimony of the defendant is consistent with objective facts in the basic point of view as a whole, and there was no probability that the testimony of the defendant goes against his memory, and that there was no probability that the testimony of the defendant goes against his memory, and that the above perjury is justified in comparison with the records. Even if the witness who has lawfully taken an oath under Acts makes a statement contrary to his memory, even if it is established and the testimony is consistent with objective facts, the establishment of perjury does not affect the establishment of perjury, and that the testimony is not required to affect the trial.

However, in cases where it is unclear whether the defendant's statement is contrary to his memory or not, if a witness made a statement consistent with objective facts, it cannot be determined that he made a statement contrary to his memory unless there is any special circumstance. Further, even if the whole purport of the fact, which is the contents of the testimony, is consistent with objective facts, and if it does not go against his memory, it is extremely minor part constituting the fact, if it is acknowledged that it was due to the fact that it was due to the injury of the purpose of examination or the mistake, this cannot be established. In the same purport, if the court below's statement is not contrary to his memory in view of the whole, and it is not against his memory, and there is a statement that is not consistent with his memory, and it cannot be viewed as a false statement contrary to his memory, and even if it is compared with the record, there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles of perjury or misunderstanding of facts due to a violation of the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit in the course of the preparation of evidence.

Therefore, the appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kang Jong-young (Presiding Justice)