A. It is clear that misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (Defendant 1) E and F exercise the force of force against the Defendant. As such, “E was pushed down the Defendant’s timber and pushed down the chest (man), and F was shakened by both the Defendant’s lux around the Defendant’s back.

“The Defendant’s complaint is not a false fact, but rather a somewhat exaggerated fact on the basis of facts.”

2) The lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant criminal facts on the basis of the following facts: (a) although the act of the E and F is beyond the degree to be evaluated as a justifiable act, the Defendant concealed such circumstances and accused of the instant criminal facts.

However, the defendant was aware that the exercise of force of E and F was assaulted in the interest of the defendant, and it was unaware that E and F may constitute legitimate acts, etc.

Therefore, the contents of the instant complaint do not constitute changing the nature of the entire facts of the instant complaint to the extent that it is likely to undermine the legal stability of individuals who are not subject to a state's trial action or an unfair punishment.

B. Improper sentencing (a pair of punishment) 1) The punishment (one million won a penalty) imposed by the Defendant by the lower court is too heavy.

2) The Prosecutor’s sentence is too minor.

2. Determination

A. In addition to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, filing a complaint with the effect that “E and F did not use force against the Defendant, but did not use force against the Defendant,” and it constitutes “report of false facts,” which is the objective element of the crime of false accusation, even though the Defendant perceived that E and F did not use force against the Defendant.”