A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles does not contain any entry of a tax invoice in the delivery cost invoice for April 2007 against E (hereinafter “the instant request”) in D’s name, and the seal imprint affixed by “A” is not based on the seal of the Defendant, and thus, the instant request was forged or altered. The Defendant’s contents of the complaint are not false facts, but did not have intention to make a false accusation because there was no awareness of false facts.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below finding guilty of the charged facts of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of judgment

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles 1) In a crime of false accusation, a report of false facts refers to a conclusive or dolusent recognition and report that the reported fact goes against objective facts. Thus, even if it is inconsistent with objective facts, if the reported person is aware of the truth, the crime of false accusation is not established. However, even if it is based on objective facts known to the reporting person, it refers to the case where the reported person cannot be perceived as false, or there is a possibility of false facts. It does not include the case where the reported person knows that the reported fact is false, or is likely to be false, based on objective facts known to the reporting person, but it does not include the case where the reported person thought that he/she is correct in light of the legal principles as to this case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 200Do1908, 200Da620, Jul. 4, 200; 206Do4255, Sept. 22, 2006).