When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On January 2016, the Defendant prepared a false complaint with respect to F using a computer at the E-Attorney Office located in Ansan-si, Dong-si.

Around June 9, 2015, the complaint filed that “F, the Defendant C, was injured by brain-dead, salvine salvines, salvines, 1020-7, Cheongju-gun-gun, Cheongju-gun, Cheongju-gun, Cheongju-gun, Cheongju-gun, Cheongju-gun, Cheongju-gun, and the complainant was salved with the main body of the complainant.”

The content or fact that “the defendant F was severely punished,” and that F did not have any injury to the defendant.

Nevertheless, on January 15, 2016, the defendant submitted the above written complaint to the public service offices of the Daegu District Public Prosecutor's Office located in the 67-ro of Seongbuk-gun, Seongbuk-gun.

As a result, the defendant made F a false accusation for the purpose of having F punished criminal punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of F, G, and H;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect with respect to F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article 156 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime and Article 156 of the Selection of Punishment Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The assertion and judgment of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Inasmuch as the alleged defendant was assaulted and injured as stated in the criminal complaint as stated in F and G, there is no fact that he did not mislead the victim.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of each of the above evidence evidence evidence, the defendant's accusation of false facts and the victim's false facts shall be sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above assertion.

① The F and G consistently stated from the investigative agency to the present court that the F and the Defendant were only at the time of the instant case and that they did not commit assault to the victim.