Therefore, since the defendant filed a complaint against D due to the crime of larceny, fabrication of private documents, and fraud of the above investigation document, the judgment of the court below which recognized the defendant's crime of false accusation is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. On December 20, 2013, the lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, submitted a copy of the identification card of the Defendant, a copy of the passbook, a property tax certificate, a resident registration certificate directly issued by the Defendant, a resident registration certificate, and a resident registration certificate. On February 24, 2014, the Defendant submitted a resident registration certificate and a resident registration certificate issued by the Defendant even at the time of entering into a self-lease agreement, and the Defendant issued at an investigative agency a certificate and a resident registration certificate to obtain a loan under the name of the Defendant, and suffered mental damage from D, thereby thefting the certificate of the seal imprint.

A complaint of false facts was filed

In full view of the fact that the Defendant stated that the instant vehicle was released and that there was only ten days after the instant vehicle was released and that the Defendant, who was registered as the owner of the vehicle, was to obtain a loan as a security, and that the Defendant directly prepared the said vehicle, and that the said contract was accompanied by the self-lease agreement on February 24, 2014, etc., the Defendant permitted D to purchase and lease the vehicle under the name of the Defendant using the Defendant’s certificate of seal impression and driver’s license.

Since it is reasonable to see that the defendant's seal imprint certificate and driver's license of the defendant in an investigative agency are stolen, the defendant's vehicle transaction contract and lease contract in the name of the defendant are forged.