Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

B On October 23, 2015, the Seoul Eastern District Court was prosecuted for the crime of assault (the summary of the factory room: around May 25, 2015, the outline of the factory room) and was tried by the above court 2015 Height 3021 at the above court as he was charged with the crime of assault (the outline of the factory room: from the Songpa-gu Seoul Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan City cafeteria, the victim D's stuff is sealed by hand, and the loss floor is once) and the defendant, who is the branch of the B, was tried by the above court 2015 Height 3021. For B, there was no fact that the defendant, at the time, was sealed with the victim's neck at the time, or was charged with the neck.

The purpose of “proving was to perjury.”

Accordingly, around 15:00 on March 28, 2016, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the case of assault against Defendant B at the Seoul Eastern District Court No. 3 located in 404, Kasan-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, Seoul, the Seoul Eastern District Court No. 304 on March 28, 2016, and the above court No. 2015 order No. 3021, 3021.

“I became aware of the question”.

The answer to "," and it is essential to determine whether the defendant was not guilty of having committed the crimes of smuggling when all the pages were seen.

“No question,” and “no question,”

It is necessary to answer ", while there is vagabonds, the defendant has been at the time of her cream of D.

“There is no fact” in the question “.”

“The answer was made.”

However, on May 25, 2015, the Defendant, along with B, drinked alcoholic beverages at the “C” restaurant operated by E, and then, from E, a restaurant proprietor, “dices the accounts.”

“Along with the question, E, who became aware of his misunderstanding, continued to misunderstanding the Defendant, he was aware of the fact that he was tightly scambling the D’s scambling with D’s scambl with his hand floor, and the Defendant was scamblifying the above scambl with B, and the Defendant was scambl with the above scambl with his scam.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution;