A. The Defendant did not err by mistake of facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, but did not mislead E.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (two years of imprisonment with prison labor for one year suspension, two years of community service order, two hundred hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion in its judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal doctrine by explaining the judgment on the issue under the title “the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion”. In full examination of the evidence examined by the lower court and the lower court, the lower court’s judgment is justifiable and did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged by the Defendant.

B. The Defendant did not have been punished for the same offense, and the Defendant did not actually receive criminal punishment due to the instant case. However, the crime of false accusation is a crime detrimental to the State’s criminal justice function. The crime of false accusation against a famous artist who is sensitive to public image or social reputation in order to occupy a favorable position in civil disputes, the nature of the crime of the instant crime is not weak, and the Defendant did not receive a letter from a person who is under suspicion, and taking into account all the sentencing conditions shown in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, etc., it cannot be said that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.