beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.05.21 2014노2586

무고

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: ① on June 13, 2013 and the following 14th day of the following day, the Defendant was actually subject to actual assault D from the official room; ② on the 19th day of the same month, the Defendant submitted the accusation report and the written application of the Supreme Court with respect to such assault to F, but F filed a criminal complaint against D and F because F did not receive it, and thus, there was no lack of accusation against victims.

2. In full view of the following facts admitted by the lower court and the appellate court based on the evidence duly admitted and examined, the Defendant actually committed an assault from D, or filed a false criminal complaint with F for the purpose of having a criminal punishment, even though the Defendant did not have filed a criminal complaint and a written application for the said assault with F.

A. D consistently states that there was no physical contact between the Defendant and the Defendant on June 13, 2013 at an investigative agency (the investigative agency No. 382 of the Investigation Records) and the lower court’s court on June 13, 2013, and that there was no assault against the Defendant in the official room on the following day. As to whether D moved to the official room on June 14, 2013, it is consistent with the statement that there was no assault against the victim in the course of the investigative agency and the lower court’s legal statements, and even based on the testimony of G investigative agency (the investigative record No. 384 of the Investigation Records), the witness H’s testimony, D or other correctional officers on June 14, 2013, credibility is recognized in the above statement of D.

B. At the time, N at the trial court, on June 13, 2013, stated that the Defendant was not aware of the fact that the Defendant was investigated in the official room, and on June 14, 2013, the Defendant appeared to have avoided disturbance in the official room, but D or G did not assault the Defendant, and the official room is transparent glass and thus cannot be used without permission.

C. F. It is from the Defendant on June 19, 2013 at the investigative agency (the investigative record No. 434 pages) and the court below’s court.