Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

(In fact, the Defendant had visited the vehicle registration office along with C on the day of the instant case, but this was merely accompanied by C to change the vehicle number of Down Pest Engine (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) under his own name, and there was no consent to change the said vehicle into the joint name of the Defendant. Thus, the Defendant did not file a false complaint.

Judgment

The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act provides, “The crime for which a judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and the crime for which a final judgment has become final and conclusive shall be concurrent crimes.” Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act provides, “If there is a concurrent crime which has not been adjudicated, a sentence shall be imposed in consideration of equity between the crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive and the crime for which judgment has not become final and conclusive. In such cases, the punishment may

However, according to the records, the defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Daejeon District Court on February 4, 2010 and the judgment became final and conclusive on the 12th of the same month. The crime of false accusation in this case was committed after the judgment became final and conclusive and the crime of false accusation in this case did not constitute a concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, but the court below determined the facts charged in this case by applying the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts as to the facts charged of this case is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

The judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below is admitted as follows.