logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.08.30 2019노1163
위증
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal reveals that the Defendant made a false statement in light of the position, the duties in charge, and the relevant litigation process in the hospital (hereinafter “instant hospital”) even though he/she was aware of the fact that “C had no additional conviction after May 1, 2014,” and thus, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this fact even though the intention of perjury was recognized.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined as follows, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, and (i) C was admitted to the instant hospital on March 1, 2014; and (ii) the same month.

7. From among the departments’ conference-type plenary session, he/she shown symptoms of a telegraphic sclron sclifies to Genal-clron sclifi, returned to the emergency room at around 00:17 on March 8, 2014, the next day after being treated in the emergency room at around 21:34 on the same day (hereinafter “the first letter”), and returned to the country on April 8, 2014 (hereinafter “the first letter”), even if he/she did not reach the degree of loss of food while assisting the operation room on April 10, 2014, he/she was able to obtain blood, and she was able to sit in (sncope), and “the second letter” is combined with “the first letter” and “the first letter” respectively.

2. The main question of the Defendant of the instant hospital was about C’s attempted criminal cases or the investigation of the instant hospital and the criticism of the press civic groups, etc., and there was no examination of C’s actual correspondence. The Defendant prepared the instant testimony and reviewed the materials again.

Even if so, it is difficult to view that the above data related to each of the above facts were examined in detail and it was well-founded. ③ At the time of the testimony of this case, the first question about each of the facts of this case was at issue, such as the truth, until the withdrawal of the defendant C from the contract post after the conversion of the defendant C to the contract post.

The defendant is the question of "," and the defendant is health by serving two times in the hospital of this case.

arrow