The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles as follows, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

① As long as the Defendant acquired by deception the vehicle through deception of D, E, and H and thereby lost the possession of the vehicle, even if the Defendant reported that the vehicle was stolen, this is consistent with the objective facts, and thus, the Defendant’s act does not constitute an accusation.

② Since the Defendant did not specify the intent to avoid the crime at the time of reporting the theft of the instant case, it does not constitute the crime of false accusation under Article 3 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act.

B. Even if the Defendant’s conviction is recognized, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the grounds for appeal, the lower court’s determination on the grounds of appeal 1) 1. The Defendant: (a) purchased the instant vehicle from the Defendant as collateral on September 7, 2010; (b) purchased the instant vehicle from D and D, the representative director of the Dispute Settlement Bank Co., Ltd., and E, a general director, for the purpose of purchasing the vehicle and making an investment in the vehicle using the vehicle as collateral, and giving profits to the money that incurred from the purchase of another vehicle and then export the vehicle; and (c) purchased the instant vehicle in the name of the Defendant (Evidence evidence record 95, 110 pages); (b) purchased the instant vehicle from F with the intent of H known through D and E, with the Defendant’s loan to purchase the vehicle with interest on December 13, 2010; and (d) did not pay the Defendant’s loan of KRW 10,000,000,00 as interest on the instant vehicle (Evidence evidence 305-1, 75-1).74).7.7.