However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On November 18, 2016, the Defendant received a written diagnosis of two weeks in advance, and submitted a written diagnosis at around 14:42 the above police station economic crime investigation and the economic6 team office of the same day to the effect that “the Defendant was fluoring with 111-o, Busan High-ro, Busan High-ro, and drinking with C around 16:30 on September 17, 2016, and fluoring with C and C around 16:30 on September 17, 2016, and fluoring with C and fluoring with C and fluoring with the end of fluoring with the end of fluoring with the end of fluoring with the end of fluoring with the end of 6:42 on the same day.”

However, the fact that C was forced from the Defendant to spawn, and was unilaterally faced with the Defendant, and there was no assault against the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant filed a false complaint with C for the purpose of having C criminal punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the witness C and D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant Article 156 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

2. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (including the fact that the injured party is not subject to the punishment of the accused);

3. The main sentence of Article 186 of the Criminal Procedure Act bearing the costs of lawsuit;