logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.02.02 2015노1660
위증
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. On July 28, 2010, the Defendant appeared to talk about the instant land owned by G, such as the establishment of a right to collateral security, in the F coffee shop located in the wife population E.

Therefore, the testimony stated in the facts charged of this case is true and true in accordance with memory.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the charge of this case on the ground that the defendant made a false statement contrary to memory is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant testified that he/she had testified against his/her memory as stated in the facts charged in the instant case and testified false facts.

It is reasonable to see that there is no evidence to reverse it.

The above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

① G does not have any consent to the establishment of the instant right to collateral security from an investigative agency to the court of the court below, nor did it contain any explanation from D.

“The statement was made to the effect that “........”

② On July 28, 2010, the document prepared by the Defendant, D, etc. on the creation of the instant right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) by G was likely to have been done for the transfer of ownership to the instant land.

③ D explained to H, who introduced G, about the creation of the instant right to collateral security.

However, H statements from investigative agencies to the court of the court below that no explanation of the establishment of the instant right to collateral security has been provided.

④ After receiving documents necessary for the registration of the transfer of ownership of the instant land from G, D had the said land offered as security to R, and deceiving G to borrow KRW 500 million, and acquired the certificate of personal seal impression, general seal impression certificate, power of attorney, letter of seal impression, etc. for sale and purchase of real estate from G.

“The District Court 201 senior order 3710 as the facts charged.

arrow