Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (six months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the prosecutor applied for permission to amend the indictment in this case as stated in the following facts constituting a crime. This court's permission changes the subject of the judgment. Thus, the judgment of the court below that changed the subject of the judgment can no longer be maintained.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserts that the amendment of indictment by the prosecutor constitutes a partial revocation of the indictment, but the above amendment is not a revocation of the prosecution for part of several crimes, but a withdrawal of the charge, which is a form of the amendment of indictment, and thus, the appellate court is also allowed. Since the contents of the amendment are not detrimental to the identity of the facts charged, the Defendant’s assertion

However, the judgment of the court below has such reasons for ex officio reversal.

Even if the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, this paper examines it.

3. In the case of a false accusation against a mistake of fact, the criminal intent is not necessarily required to be a conclusive intention, and it is sufficient to do so with willful negligence.

As such, the crime of false accusation is established by reporting the fact that the reporting person is not true, and it is not necessary to ensure that the reported fact is false, and the purpose of filing a complaint is the other party.