The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

On May 27, 2014, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the Daejeon District Court Hongsung-gun District Court (hereinafter “C criminal case”) case No. 2014DaMa5113, May 27, 2014, the summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) stated in the judgment of the court below, at around 16:00, as to the part of paragraph (1) of the crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, the Defendant responded to the question that “A witness is aware of the fact that he was the F honorary branch of the E president,” but the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the guilty of the Defendant, although the Defendant did not make a false statement contrary to his memory, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

Although the Defendant had been aware of the fact that G was dismissed as he worked in the same company as G with regard to the criminal facts of the judgment of the court below, G did not have been aware of the fact that it filed a lawsuit against the company.

Therefore, the defendant, in the C criminal case, heard the question of “A’s attorney who knows about G case,” and asked the defendant about “G’s litigation case,” and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts against the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty, even though the defendant did not make a false statement contrary to memory.

Judgment

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below's duly adopted and investigated evidence on the part of the criminal facts of the judgment below, i.e., C's defense counsel's question in the C criminal case is merely limited to "the chairperson knows that he was the F honorary branch", and in light of the process of witness examination, etc., the defendant is identified in the past.