(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.04.30 2018노4622 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.04.30 2018노4622

위증

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the Defendants.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A testified to the effect that there was no misunderstanding of facts that Defendant A could not be seen as a shot eye and that C could not be seen as having a friendly relationship with D, and Defendant B testified to the effect that “no friendlyness” was committed in the course of resistance by Defendant B merely stated to the effect that “no fluence was committed” because it was deemed that the degree of punishment for assault was not a type of force. Thus, perjury is not established.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one million won per fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendants testified to the effect that C did not assault D in the Daegu District Court Decision 2017 High Court Decision 699 and 2017No4136 case (hereinafter “related case”), the Defendants testified to the effect that C did not assault D in the assault case against C (hereinafter “related case”), the assault by C was recognized in the related case and sentenced to a fine of KRW 30,000,000 for C. According to CCTV images, it is confirmed that C was sealed of D’s chest to capture micros, and that at the time, the Defendants reported to comply with it.

As to this, Defendant A testified to the effect that he was not friendly because he was not able to be seen as having a satisfy, and that he did not make a statement contrary to memory. However, Defendant A again made a statement to the effect that he did not seem to have been friendly according to the entries in the examination protocol of the relevant case, and the testimony at the time of the relevant case is deemed to have been a statement contrary to memory.

Defendant

B At the time of the examination of the relevant case, he/she responded to the question, “I have not shown tangible power” and “I have checked D”.

This is because of the nature of a natural behavior, and there was no possibility of doing so.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2017.01.10 2016노3861

-대구지방법원 2016.10.13 2015고정1218

-서울동부지방법원 2016.12.16 2016노993

-광주지방법원 2014.09.18 2013노2600

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.04.30 2014고정273