However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On March 15, 2016, the Defendant opened a cell phone in order to raise funds to meet the Internet game cost, introduced C through B, and opened three cell phones in the name of the suspect from March 15, 2016 to January 2, 2017 through C through C, and disposed of it to the middle and high-ranking businessman.

Since then, the suspect had tried to file a criminal complaint with C in order to eliminate the situation after making a false statement as C had arbitrarily opened the cell phone from his own her own 's own cell phone due to the unpaid mobile phone payment.

Around January 4, 2018, the Defendant prepared a complaint to the effect that “C has opened a cell phone by stealing the name of the mother of the suspect and the suspect,” and submitted the complaint to the public service center of the Gyeong-nam Police Station in the same day, which is located in 53 Dong-ro Do-ro of the same Eup, and made a false statement with the above content on January 9, 2018, by attending the above police station investigation and intelligence team office, and attending the above police station investigation and intelligence team office, and serving C as the crime of forging documents and the crime of uttering of falsified investigation documents.

Ultimately, the Defendant accused C of false facts against public offices or public officials for the purpose of having C receive criminal punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Court statements and statements of the accused;

1. Examination protocol of suspect C by the prosecution;

1. Each reply details, complaint forms, accompanying documents, and specification of transactions;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report and accompanying documents;

1. Article 156 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 157, 153, and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (a confession before judgment of an innocent case becomes final and conclusive) of the Criminal Act to be mitigated legally;

1. The fact that the defendant under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution has not been led to confession at the investigation stage and has not been prosecuted against the victim.