The defendant shall be innocent.

1. At around 15:00 on April 14, 2017, the Defendant appeared and testified as a witness of the Defendant’s case, such as the Seoul Northern District Court Decision 302, Dobong-gu Seoul Northern District Court Decision 749, Seoul Northern District Court Decision 302, the Seoul Northern District Court, 2016No. 1659 C, which was located in the above court, on the following grounds: (a) took an oath; (b) he directly visited the Defendant’s operation of the Defendant in Gangnam-gu, Seoul; (c) on May 5, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “In response to the prosecutor’s question on May 5, 2014, the Defendant sent a penalty payment notice and KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant at the time of requesting the payment of the penalty under the name of G; and (d) made a false statement to the effect that “At the time of this request the Prosecutor’s memory and a false statement of the fine for negligence.”

2. Perjury is established when a witness who has taken an oath under the law makes a statement contrary to his/her memory, and such statement does not conform to objective facts.

Even if a witness’s statement is recognized as perjury, it cannot be readily determined as perjury before examining whether it goes against the witness’s memory (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 88Do80, Dec. 13, 198; 95Do192, Aug. 23, 1996). In order to recognize that the witness’s statement is a perjury, there should be proof that the contents of the statement can have sufficient conviction to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the fact that the witness’s memory is contrary to the witness’s memory. If it does not reach this, perjury may not be punished (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Do7630, Mar. 27, 2014). In full view of the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is against his/her memory as long as there is no reasonable doubt.