A. Since the contents of the instant complaint are consistent with objective truth, the crime of false accusation is not established.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on July 23, 2013, the following facts are revealed: (a) on the first day, the Defendant shown the lease agreement (the 12 page of the investigation record) stating that D would be null and void at the time of termination, and may remove this building; and (b) on the said lease agreement, the Defendant’s signature and seal may be recognized. As such, it is evident that D displayed the lease agreement (the 10 page of the investigation record) in which D did not include the phrase of this case, and the content of the instant complaint that D was signed and sealed by changing D to the lease agreement (the 12 page of the investigation record) containing the said phrase to the cresh of the Defendant’s job.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake of the above facts is without merit.

B. In full view of the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records of the instant case’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing, the lower court appears to have been reasonably determined by fully taking into account all the circumstances, including the various reasons for sentencing alleged by the Defendant, and no special circumstance exists to the extent that the lower court’s punishment is to be changed.

Therefore, the defendant's argument that the above sentencing is unfair is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.