The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is in charge of E from March 5, 2008, as public officials Daegu Viewing and Viewing D.

Around 16:00 on September 20, 2012, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the Defendant’s violation of the Funeral Services, etc. Act against F, and testified at the Daegu District Court (No. 202), which was located in the Daegu Suwon-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, as a witness of the Defendant’s case.

On July 1, 2009, after the interview between Daegu-si and the Victim Countermeasure Committee at the office of the executive branch of the Daegu-si on the 17th day of the same month, the interview was conducted with 80,000 persons for each of four members of the Daegu-si and the Victims Countermeasure Committee, and around that time, the interview was ordered to rescue the contents of the interview.

Nevertheless, the Defendant’s defense counsel stated that “The Daegu City, after this day’s substitution, ordered all the participants to propose the contents of the interview,” and later, in relation to the commemorative projects, the Defendant made a false statement contrary to memory (hereinafter “the testimony of this case”) and presented a false statement contrary to memory by stating that “The consultation with the representative of the bereaved family, such as the Deputy Mayor, the Director General, and the director general, was reached with respect to the minimum human resources, such as the head of the fire-fighting headquarters, was reached.”

2. Determination

A. (1) Perjury is established when a witness who has taken an oath under the law states a fact contrary to his/her memory. Thus, even if such statement is inconsistent with objective facts, it cannot be readily concluded that it is perjury before examining whether it goes against the witness memory. The conviction in a criminal trial ought to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have the authenticity of the facts charged to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Do7630 Decided March 27, 2014). (2) Whether a witness’s testimony constitutes a false statement contrary to his/her memory or not should be determined by understanding the entire testimony in the relevant interrogation procedure as one of the whole, rather than the part of the simple part of his/her testimony.