무고등
The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
but for three years from the date this judgment becomes final.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Since a misunderstanding of facts by a defendant constitutes a crime of fraud; H constitutes a crime of forging a private document; the crime of uttering of a private document; and the crime of fraud, the accusation of each of the crimes of fraud constitutes a true fact; the defendant did not have committed a false accusation; and the defendant did not have inflicted an injury on H using the injection equipment, the judgment of the first instance which found the defendant guilty against the defendant was erroneous and adversely affected the judgment.
B. The sentencing of the first instance court of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on mistake of facts
A. 1) The Defendant alleged the charge of false accusation. The Defendant knew that all of the above ground buildings on each land of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, P, Q, and R were not to be removed from the illegal building. In the process of requesting the attorney-at-law to act as an agent for a complaint, the entire building of this case must be removed from the illegal building at will, and the construction of the building is impossible after its removal, and thus there was no intention to do so (hereinafter “Claim 1”).
) In fact, since the corrective order was issued on the ground that part of the instant building was illegal, the above accusation is merely an exaggeration of circumstantial facts based on true facts and thus does not constitute a false accusation (hereinafter “Second assertion”).
As to the charge of forging private documents and the charge of uttering of private documents, H, even though the purchase price of the instant real estate was KRW 1.96 million, was actually KRW 1.96 million, was forged and exercised a sales contract under the name of the Defendant with respect to the instant real estate, thereby constituting a false accusation, and thus, the Defendant does not constitute a false accusation (hereinafter “third argument”).
(ii) the first instance court and the first instance court have duly adopted and examined the facts of recognition.