Text
Defendant
A and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 2,000,000 won, and Defendant C shall be punished by a fine of 1,000,000 won.
The defendants are the defendants.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. Defendant A, while working as a broker assistant for a licensed real estate agent B, was a person who assisted and assisted the contract that he takes over from the second floor of the building owned by G (H) to the second floor of the building located in Nam-gu, Gwangju (the business operator is registered in the name of G’s fraud) by J.
On November 14, 2012, the Defendant appeared and taken an oath in the 303 Gwangju Dong-gu, Gwangju Dong-gu, Gwangju District Court 401, as a witness of the damages compensation case No. 2012Ga35687, which the said J filed against H and G (H).
The Defendant, as the legal representative of the Plaintiff (J) of the instant case, testified “I asked Defendant H to be present at the time” under the question of “I have been present at the time”.
However, on February 24, 2011, H participated in the above job.
Accordingly, the defendant made a false statement contrary to his memory and raised perjury.
2. Defendant B is a licensed real estate agent as described in paragraph (1) and as a broker by J to accept the above singing from K.
On November 14, 2012, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the above damage compensation case in the court of Gwangju Dong-gu, 303 Gwangju District Court 401, and took an oath.
As the legal representative of the Plaintiff (J) of the instant case, the Defendant testified as “I asked Defendant H was present at that time” under the question of “I have been present at that time.”
However, on February 24, 2011, H participated in the above job.
Accordingly, the defendant made a false statement contrary to his memory and raised perjury.
3. Defendant C is a person who owns a four-story building with the above singing.
On December 12, 2012, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the above damage compensation case in the court of Gwangju Dong-gu, 303 Gwangju District Court 401, and took an oath.
The Defendant’s attorney stated that “it is clear that Defendant H was not erroneous when preparing the Plaintiff’s side and contract.”