A. Defendant A did not affix the seal on the instant land purchase receipt prepared by C; Defendant A did not enter the terms of the contract with the buyer M as the other party to the contract; and the content stated in the said land purchase receipt is different from the content, amount, size, etc. under the contract with Defendant A; Defendant A filed a complaint with Defendant A with Defendant A with the belief that the said land purchase receipt was forged; thus, Defendant A did not have any intention to file a complaint with Defendant A.

B. Defendant B is different from the transaction details entered in the land transaction receipt of this case between Defendant A and C, and at the time, Defendant B was memoryed that the receipts were written in blanks that did not have been reduced, and thus, Defendant B did not have the intent of perjury.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant A’s assertion, Defendant A asserted the same purport in the lower court’s judgment, and the lower court rejected Defendant A’s assertion on the following grounds. The crime of false accusation is established when the reported fact goes against the objective truth with the aim of having another person subject to criminal punishment or disciplinary disposition. Even if the reported content contains any content contrary to the objective truth, if it is not an important part affecting the nature of the crime, but is merely an exaggeration of the circumstances of the reported fact, it is not a crime of false accusation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Do771, May 31, 1996). In the crime of false accusation, the criminal intent does not necessarily have to be a conclusive intention, and the crime of false accusation is established even in cases where a reporting person considers it correct in his/her assertion without disregarding the objective fact known to him/her, while disregarding it.

On the other hand, in criminal cases, disposal documents are also used.