Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 200,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay each of the above fines, each of them is 100.

Punishment of the crime

1. At around 14:00 on August 28, 2013, Defendant A appeared in the court of Seoul Administrative Court No. 202 located in Yang Jae-dong Seoul Seocho-gu, Seoul, and took an oath as a witness of the case of revocation of the revocation of the authorization for establishment of the association filed by the said court against Defendant A, 2012Guhap42502.

Before the presiding judge of the third part of the above court in the trial of the above case, the defendant presented to the defendant the evidence Nos. 18-2 and No. 53-2 of the evidence No. 18 (written consent for the dissolution of the first association) and No. 53 (written consent for the dissolution of the second association), and testified to the purport that "the plaintiff's agent directly prepared the two written consents to the effect that "the signature of the witness stated in the above written consent was written in the name of the witness."

However, in fact, the defendant did not directly write the signature of No. 18-2 of the evidence No. 55 (the first written consent to the dissolution of the partnership) and did not properly memory this fact.

Accordingly, the defendant made a false statement contrary to his memory and raised perjury.

2. Defendant B appeared as a witness of the case described in paragraph (1) at the time and place of the statement in paragraph (1) and taken an oath.

Before the presiding judge of the Seoul Administrative Court, the Defendant testified to the effect that the Plaintiff’s agent directly prepared a witness for the following reasons: “The Plaintiff’s agent submitted two written consents in the name of the witness, and the signature of the witness as stated in the above written consents was written in the name of the witness,” and that “The signature of the witness as stated in the above written consent was written in the form of the witness at his own discretion,” before the presiding judge of the Seoul Administrative Court No. 3. 18 (Written Consent for the Dissolution of the First Association) and No. 5 (

However, in fact, the defendant did not directly write the signature of No. 15 (Written Consent for the Dissolution of the First Association) of the evidence No. 18 (Written Consent for the Dissolution of the Association), and such fact was not well memory.

In this respect.