무고
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the content of the report on environmental civil petition submitted by the defendant to the Daegu Regional Environmental Office is not false.
The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.
2. Determination
A. On December 2, 2012, the summary of the facts charged was prepared by the Defendant, at the Defendant’s house located in Daegu Suwon-gu, Singu, for the purpose of having E, the representative director of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) receive criminal punishment, a written accusation of “environmental civil petition report” with a false content of D using a computer for the purpose of having D obtain criminal punishment.
The accusation note states that “D is less than 10 tons of Aluminium produced for a period of one month, and in a factory, it is producing an Aluminium of more than 100 metric tons. At night, an Aluminy is covered by the expansion of time. It covers the expansion of time. The fact is that the D’s factory was operated in accordance with its permission, and there was no fact that trees in the vicinity of the factory have caused the death of the horse.” The fact was that D’s factory was operated, and there was no fact that there was no fact that there was a high pollution that trees in the vicinity of the factory have caused the death of the horse.
On December 31, 2012, the Defendant received a written accusation from the Daegu regional environmental office located in the Daegu regional environmental office in Suwon-gu, Daegu regional environmental office by mail and made an appeal to E.
B. Determination 1) The crime of false accusation is established when the reported fact goes against the objective truth with the intention of having another person subject to criminal punishment or disciplinary disposition, and the requirement that the reported fact goes against the objective fact requires positive proof. The crime of false accusation cannot be established by readily concluding that the reported fact goes against the objective truth solely with the passive proof that the authenticity of the reported fact cannot be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do5114, Jan. 27, 2004; 2007Do6406, Oct. 11, 2007).