1. As to ground of appeal No. 1

If evidence is collected at the time of the trial of the first instance maintained by the court below, it shall be sufficient to recognize the defendant's non-criminal conduct of this case, and it shall not be deemed that there is any error such as the theory of lawsuit in the court below's decision that maintained the judgment

In the case of the crime of false accusation, the crime is established if it is not sufficient to determine the authenticity of the reported contents, but to determine it with the falsity of the reported contents, and it is not sufficient to determine it. Therefore, despite the absence of the defendant's communications with the non-indicted 1 with the non-indicted 1 by the time evidence of the judgment of the court of first instance, it is sufficient to recognize the falsity of the reported contents against the non-indicted 2 in the Dong site of the Seoul District Public Prosecutor's Office. Therefore, there is no reason to criticize the measures of the court below on the ground of the truth of the reported contents.

2. As to the second ground for appeal:

According to the records, as of April 24, 1984, Non-Indicted 2 submitted a written complaint to the Gangnam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Police Station at around 23 April 23, 1984 that the defendant and Non-Indicted 1 passed through the Dodong apartment at around 50, 1984, and the defendant and Non-Indicted 1 submitted a written complaint for divorce issued by the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Court on April 24, 1984, along with the certificate of receipt of the written complaint for divorce, at around 17, 1983, 380, 36, 40, 1984, from the 309 office of Mapo-gu, Mapo-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City to 309, 1984, which were 4:00,000, which were 14:00,000,000,000 on April 23, 1984, 2004.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)