무고
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, there is no express agreement that C has made an investment of KRW 50 million to the defendant before operating the table of this case, and rather C has invested approximately KRW 67 million in the table of this case. Thus, the defendant's complaint of this case that "C has acquired money of KRW 30 million from the defendant without investing KRW 57 million agreed upon," is false against objective truth, and the defendant has been aware of the above facts in light of the fact that "the defendant has been responsible for managing business funds, such as preparing cash receipts and disbursements in the table of this case, etc., in the table of this case, the intention of criminal intent can be recognized."
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case on the ground that there is no proof of crime, is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.
2. Determination
A. Around March 23, 2015, the Defendant drafted a false complaint against C with respect to the charge of the instant case.
The criminal complaint stating that "A, who is the defendant, did not invest 50 million won in a consignment room by investing 50 million won in around January 2015, but was obtained from the defendant only 30 million won, and acquired it by fraud," and the facts that C directly invested about about KRW 70 million from the defendant, and operated a consignment hall in the name of "D" from the early February 2015 with the defendant as well as the defendant, without investing KRW 50 million in the consignment room (the defendant A) and KRW 30 million from the defendant.
Nevertheless, around March 23, 2015, the defendant submitted a false complaint to the public official in the public service center of the Cheongju District Public Prosecutor's Office.
As a result, the defendant was arrested for the purpose of having C receive criminal punishment.
B. The lower court’s determination is based on the evidence duly admitted and examined.