Judgment

The circumstances favorable to the defendant are recognized, such as the confession of the crime of this case by the defendant, and the defendant is the first offender who has not been subject to criminal punishment so far.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant, even though the Defendant had placed the NJ as a collateral for the vehicle thief, thereby damaging the State’s proper judicial function by filing a false accusation against the J by vehicle thief who was urged the return of the said vehicle by the lessee company. In light of the circumstances and contents of the crime, the responsibility for the crime is heavy, even though the J was investigated four times or more by the investigative agency due to the crime of this case, the Defendant did not use it or agree with the J. The Criminal Procedure Act of Korea, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, has the unique area of the first deliberation as to the determination of the sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of the first deliberation in the sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the first deliberation sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The circumstances of the lower court’s previous normal sentence against the Defendant do not seem to fall under any special circumstances, such as changing the circumstances of the Defendant’s environment.

In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no ground for appeal by the defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition.