무고
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and misapprehension of legal principles) stated that C did not have any fact against D or E, and in the case of assault, it is logically difficult to present the case where there is no exaggeration in the circumstance different from the injury in the case of assault. Thus, the existence of an act of assault itself should be determined as to whether a crime of false accusation is established. Thus, the Defendant constitutes a crime of false accusation.
Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not guilty verdict. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on false accusation, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below
A. On December 23, 2011, the Defendant stated in the facts charged of the instant case that “In response to the assault case of 2008 against Mar society located in Maan-dong, Yan-si, Yan-si, Yan-si, Manan-si, Maan-si,” the Defendant stated in the purport that “In response to the assault case of 2008, on June 23, 201, Da 2, one of whom is a stick, hick-do, hick-do, hick-do, and hick-do, hick-do, h
However, there was no fact that C, at the same time and place as above, had two domestic violence assaulted the Defendant.
Nevertheless, on December 23, 2011, the defendant submitted the above written complaint to the public service offices of the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor's Office located in the new Dong-dong, Seocheon-si, Incheon District Public Prosecutor's Office, and filed the complaint with C.
B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) found the victim from June 201 to July 7, 201 by the police upon reporting at least three times; and (b) called the victim by the police.
6.4.
6. On February 15, 2012, it appears that the police did not dispatch, and there is room to view that the accused and the accused comprehensively included the Defendant’s assault three times in light of the contents of the accusation statement and the Defendant’s statement as of February 15, 2012. ② The Defendant consistently identified the person with the disability on the bridge as the suspect of the assault and the person with the inside of the victim, which is accurately consistent with D and E.