A. In order to consult about C and lease deposit, the defendant submitted a written complaint against C to the police. Since the defendant failed to submit additional evidence without undergoing investigation by the investigative agency, and thereby, the non-prosecution disposition was issued against C's theft suspicion, the judgment of the court below which judged that C was not guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The purpose of a false report is to obtain criminal punishment or disciplinary disposition in relation to an assertion of mistake of facts is sufficient if there is a perception that another person would be subject to criminal punishment or disciplinary disposition due to such a false report, and it does not require that the result would be produced.

In addition, the crime of false accusation is established when a false report is made to an investigative agency for the purpose of having another person subject to criminal punishment, and whether a public official who received such a report started an investigation does not affect the establishment of the crime (see Supreme Court Decision 83Do1975, Sept. 27, 1983). In full view of the facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court and the Defendant’s assertion as to motive for the accusation, the fact that the Defendant submitted a written complaint with the effect that the Defendant stolen the Defendant’s housing power, recognizing that the Defendant would be subject to criminal punishment at the Seocheon District Police Station on June 26, 2017.

Accordingly, the crime of false accusation was established, and the defendant did not respond to the police investigation.

The circumstances that the police did not submit additional evidence do not affect the establishment of the crime of false accusation.

B. We examine the argument of unfair sentencing, and there is no change in circumstances that may consider the sentencing after the judgment of the court below, and multiple sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case.