A. In light of all the circumstances, including the fact that the defendant against the defendant A was forced to withdraw unjust enrichment from a clan, and the defendant did not go against the function of the State's penal authority by leaving B and G free of charge in order to avoid liability, and that the function of the State's penal authority has deteriorated, and that the court of the court below does not deny the crime, etc., the punishment of the court below (the postponement of the sentence of imprisonment (10 months) imposed by the court of the court below) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of all the circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant’s acquisition of KRW 60 million as a commission by acting as a broker without registration is of poor quality of the crime of taking large profits by avoiding the state’s control over the real estate transaction system, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution (one year of imprisonment for a period of four months and one year of suspended execution (10 months)) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although the instant crime against Defendant A was divided after the Defendant received KRW 200 million for the purchase and sale from the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), the Defendant actively filed a false complaint with the investigative agency to the effect that B and G arbitrarily received KRW 200 million from F, and subsequently consumed it, and issued KRW 200 million from F without one’s consent. As for the instant crime, the Defendant’s act of filing a false complaint for the purpose of having another person receive criminal punishment, such as the instant crime, must be strictly punished by having another person interfere with the national criminal justice function of the State and put under the risk of having another person receive criminal punishment. According to the prosecutor’s assertion that the Defendant’s act of filing a false complaint for the purpose of interfering with the criminal justice function of the State, and did not violate the criminal law up to the trial.

However, the defendant agreed with B, G, the defendant of this case.