On June 30, 2011, the Defendant drafted a false complaint against C with a view to having C receive criminal punishment at the Rocheon Police Station located in the Simcheon-gu, Macheon-gun, Macheon-gu, Macheon-do.

The gist of the accusation is that “The Defendant C, a prisoner of the Republic of Korea, was punished for attempted murder, because he/she attempted to kill shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot.”

However, in fact, there was not only the shot in the swine, but also three persons such as the defendant, etc. were eating the said swine, and the defendant did not receive any other treatment after eating the said swine.

Nevertheless, the defendant submitted the above complaint to the police officer in the public service center of the office of the Macheon Police Station on the same day and filed the complaint with C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Copy of a protocol of suspect examination of police officer C;

1. Copy of the police statement against the defendant;

1. Copy of the complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of an appraisal request;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 156 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Reduction of punishment for a crime prescribed in Article 157, 153, or 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act;

1. Fine of 2 million won to be suspended;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act (in cases of the inducement in a workhouse, 100,000 won per day);

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Article 59(1) of the Suspension of Sentence (see, e., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da14488, Apr. 1, 2007) that the Defendant was able to take advantage of the fact that, at the time of committing the instant crime, he was able to take advantage of the fact that there were some excessive circumstances and dementia symptoms at the time, the intention of the Defendant appears to be insufficient, and that he was living faithfully other than those sentenced to a fine of one time prior to