beta
Text
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Prosecutor 1) In the facts charged of this case, the court below found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that there was no proof of criminal facts as to the perjury among the facts charged of this case. However, since the Defendant had been aware of the contents known from L as he directly involved or participated and made a false statement contrary to his memory, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. When a witness’s testimony in perjury is based on a false statement against his memory in a public prosecutor’s assertion of mistake, the whole testimony during the relevant interrogation procedure should be identified as a whole, not as a part of the simple composition of the testimony, but as a result, if it is found that the witness has made a testimony without the awareness that he/she was involved in a mistake or omission, the crime of perjury cannot be recognized.
(See Supreme Court Decision 89Do1748 delivered on May 10, 191). In light of the above legal principles, in addition to the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below did not specifically state the defendant's knowledge of the agreement on the construction cost between I and L and the process of paying interest on M, the judgment of the court below on the charge of perjury is just and it is without merit, and the prosecutor's allegation in this part is without merit.
B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties, this case is a forged case of the Defendant’s forgery of the certificate of work performance under the name of the contractor I, thereby infringing the safety and credit of the transaction of the document, the Defendant’s mistake against himself, and the Defendant’s criminal record is the same.