무고
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal D, the highest investigation agency, and the legal statement, etc., the court below found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged, despite the fact that the Defendant made a clear perception of signing and sealing as the borrower at the time of signing and sealing the loan certificate of this case and filed a false accusation, and thereby found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts in violation of the rules of evidence, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. Around September 22, 2011, the Defendant drafted a false complaint with the intent of having D, the Defendant, the Defendant, the Defendant of which, at the C attorney’s office near the Namyang-si Police Station, 20-15, in order to have D, be subject to criminal punishment.
The purpose of this complaint was that "The defendant D, on August 30, 201, forged a loan certificate under the name of the borrower A and uses it to the complainant A who is unaware of the fact."
However, on August 2006, the Defendant knew that, in the process that E borrowed KRW 300 million from D, the Defendant created a collateral on the real estate owned by the Defendant, and prepared the said loan certificate under the agreement with D, the Defendant was aware that D did not forge the above loan certificate.
Nevertheless, on September 22, 2011, the Defendant submitted a written complaint to the public service center of the Namyang Police Station 20-15, Namyang-si, Namyang-si, 201, and rejected D.
B. On the judgment of the court below, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined, the court below did not have any evidence to find that D jointly lent money to E, Defendant, and F, and that D first was established on or around June 12, 2004 on the land owned by the Defendant, Defendant, and F, or around August 24, 2006, D had a total of KRW 300 million borrowed money from D at the time of termination of the above right to collateral and the establishment of the second right to collateral, and the Defendant and F had a total of KRW 300 million borrowed money from D.