The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) did not constitute perjury by making a false statement contrary to memory while making an oath of the case claiming compensation for delay at the court of Seoul Southern District Court 311 on July 19, 201, as described in the facts charged in the instant case, at the court of Seoul Southern District Court 2010Kadan86604, as a witness of the case claiming compensation for delay.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that it sentenced the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. “False statement” under Article 152(1) of the Criminal Act refers to a statement made by a witness who has taken an oath under the law against his/her memory rather than a false fact. Therefore, when a statement contrary to memory is made, it constitutes a case where the contents of the statement are consistent with the truth (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 88Do580, Jan. 17, 1989; 84Do114, Feb. 28, 1984); according to the various evidence and sales ledger, each tax invoice, and each statement of each transaction list adopted and investigated by the court below on the premise of such legal principle, the defendant appeared as a witness of Seoul Southern Southern District Court Decision 2010Da86604, Feb. 8, 1984; and the defendant made a false statement contrary to his/her memory as stated in the facts charged in this case, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant made a false statement contrary to his/her memory.

In the same purport, the court below's decision that convicted the defendant of the facts charged in this case is just and acceptable, and there is no error that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion. Thus, the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is without merit.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is reasonable.