CONTENTS
- 1. Perjury by conspiracy | Summary of the incident
- - judgment of the lower court
- 2. Perjury by conspiracy | Supreme Court decision
- - Accomplice co-defendant recognized as witness
- - Admission of liability for perjury on the premise of guaranteeing the right to refuse testimony
- - Recognized as perjury by conspiracy
- 3. Perjury by conspiracy | Establishment requirements and level of punishment
- - Strategies for responding to false accusations of perjury
- 4. Perjury by conspiracy | Daeryun's assistance
1. Perjury by conspiracy | Summary of the incident
The crime of false perjury in court is a crime that is committed when the purpose of making a false statement in court is combined with the purpose of subjecting another person to criminal punishment or disadvantageous treatment beyond simply making a statement that is different from the facts.
It is evaluated one level more seriously than the general charge of perjury and is treated as a serious crime that violates the fairness of criminal trials and the discovery of substantive truth.
In particular, in cases where accomplices or interests are involved, if a false statement is made to avoid one's responsibility or to shift responsibility to another person, it may be a matter of conspiracy to commit perjury. Therefore, not only the content of the statement but also the intention and purpose at the time of the statement are comprehensively reviewed.
In this case, the Supreme CourtIf a co-defendant, who is an accomplice, makes a false statement after being converted into a witness through separate litigation procedures, comprehensively determines the boundaries of witness qualification, privilege against self-incrimination, and perjury liability, focusing on whether the crime of perjury by conspiracy is established.I did it.
The defendant, as the head of the public affairs department of a construction company, was indicted along with his co-defendant on charges of defrauding construction funds by fabricating and submitting site photos to conceal the construction while carrying out construction in a manner different from the design during the construction process.
Later, during the trial of the co-defendant, the defendant appeared as a witness and made a false statement to the effect of admitting the co-defendant's participation in the crime, stating as if he had received instructions that did not actually exist.
The problem was that the defendant was an accomplice and co-defendant.
in other words,The key issue in this case is whether the crime of perjury, or even conspiracy to commit perjury, can be established even if a party to the same case becomes a witness through separate procedures.It was.
judgment of the lower court
The lower court found that the defendant's statement was a false statement that clearly contradicted objective facts.
In particular, paying attention to the fact that the defendant gave instructions or detailed facts that did not actually exist regarding the co-defendant's participation in the crime, it was judged to be an intentional misstatement rather than a simple memory or expression error.
In addition, the original trial judged that the purpose of subjecting others to criminal punishment, that is, the purpose of conspiracy, was acknowledged in the statement in that the defendant composed the statement in a way that would make the co-defendant recognized as criminally responsible.
In addition, since the defendant made a statement as a witness in accordance with the separation of legal proceedings and voluntarily chose to make a statement while being informed of his right to refuse to testify, it was judged appropriate for him to be liable for perjury for that statement.
AccordinglyThe original trial found the defendant guilty and found him guilty of perjury.I did it.
2. Perjury by conspiracy | Supreme Court decision
The Supreme Court maintained the existing legal principles and ruled as follows.
Accomplice co-defendant recognized as witness
The Supreme CourtIf the proceedings are separate, the co-defendant is no longer a party to the proceedings and can serve as a witness as a third party.It was ruled that
This was based on the principle of criminal procedure law that “anyone can be a witness.”
Admission of liability for perjury on the premise of guaranteeing the right to refuse testimony
The Supreme CourtRegarding the issue of conflict with the privilege against self-incrimination, if the right to refuse testimony is guaranteed under the Criminal Procedure Act and the court has notified it, the defendant can choose whether to make a statement or not.I saw it.
Therefore, if a person chooses to make a false statement without exercising the right to refuse to testify, it is evaluated as a voluntary false statement rather than a forced statement, and it was determined that the crime of perjury can be established.
Recognized as perjury by conspiracy
The Supreme Court determined that the defendant's act was not a simple misconception of facts, but an intentional false statement to implicate a co-defendant in a crime, that is, a statement with the acknowledged purpose of slander, and affirmed the establishment of the crime of perjury for slander.
as a resultThe original trial's judgment of guilt was upheld and the appeal was dismissed.I did it.
3. Perjury by conspiracy | Establishment requirements and level of punishment
In order for the crime of perjury by conspiracy to be established, it is not enough that there is simply a false statement; there must be a statement made that is different from objective facts, and there must be recognition that the statement is false.
In addition to thisThe purpose of subjecting another person to criminal punishment or disadvantageous treatment, that is, the purpose of conspiracy, must be acknowledged. do.
This purpose is judged by comprehensively considering the content of the statement, the circumstances of the statement, and the relationship between the parties, and is reviewed more strictly in cases where interests are intertwined, such as accomplice cases.
division | perjury | conspiracy to commit perjury |
legal basis | Article 152 (1) of the Criminal Act | Article 152 (2) of the Criminal Act |
protection of legal interests | Appropriateness of judicial action | Adequacy of judicial action and protection of individual legal status |
default behavior | Misrepresentation by a sworn witness | False statements and the purpose of inflicting disadvantage on others |
subjective requirements | Awareness of Misrepresentation | False perception and slander purpose (punishment intent) |
Application situation | lay witness statement | Accomplice statement, shifting responsibility, false accusation, etc. |
level of punishment | Imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to 10 million won | Imprisonment of less than 10 years |
legal risks | distortion of facts | Inducing criminal liability of others (serious violation of legal interests) |
According to Article 152, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Act, conspiracy to commit perjury is considered a more aggravated crime than general perjury and is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
This isIt reflects the risk of distorting the judicial process through false statements and attempting to shift criminal responsibility to others.no see.
Strategies for responding to false accusations of perjury
This precedent requires the following strategic judgment in responding to actual incidents:
1) Pre-design of statement strategy in accomplice case
A co-defendant's statement simultaneously affects his or her own criminal liability, the liability of others, and the risk of perjury.
Therefore, the scope of the statement, the method of the statement, and whether or not the right to refuse testimony will be exercised must be carefully designed at the stage before the witness appears.
2) The importance of determining whether to exercise the right to refuse testimony
The right to refuse testimony is not just a right, but a key defense tool for avoiding criminal liability.
Since reckless statements can lead to perjury, you must strategically decide whether to make a statement or not.
3) Misrepresentation risk management
The crime of perjury by conspiracy is established when the following elements are combined:
- misrepresentation
- awareness (intentional)
- For the purpose of causing disadvantage to others
Especially in an accomplice structure, a detailed review of the contents of the statement is essential because statements about others can be interpreted as an intent to harm others.
4. Perjury by conspiracy | Daeryun's assistance
The crime of perjury by conspiracy is a difficult area where overall criminal litigation procedures and constitutional rights intersect.
Especially in accomplice cases, one statement can be evaluated as a separate crime, so the direction of the initial response determines the outcome of the case.
Daeryun Law Firm designs a response system to prevent expansion of criminal liability by comprehensively reviewing the statement strategy, whether to exercise the right to refuse testimony, and perjury risk analysis in accomplice rescue cases.
In addition, we verify the legal effect of statements in advance at each stage of investigation and trial and build a defense strategy to prevent unnecessary criminal liability.
In particular, in cases where there is the possibility of additional prosecution, such as conspiracy to commit perjury, a strategic response is required to control the entire procedure.
If you are in danger of being punished for charges such as conspiracy to commit perjury, etc.Help from Daeryun, the 9th largest law firm in Korea (based on 25 years of value-added tax reporting to the National Tax Service), which collaborates with criminal lawyers, the Evidence Investigation Center, and the Digital Forensics Center to present customized strategies for client cases.Please receive it.
