logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.01.15 2014고단2629
무고
Text

The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence of this case is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. On May 20, 2012, the Defendant: (a) had the head of the office office of the said attorney-at-law prepare a false complaint against F and G with the aim of having F and G receive criminal punishment from the office of the said attorney-at-law office in front of D, which is located in D and C at the time of the Government-Si of Do Government,

The criminal complaint states that "the complainant (the defendant) operates H (individual) that produces a multi-purpose large-purpose stormer, and F, the defendant, is the representative of F, the defendant, the business director of I, and G, the defendant, who is the defendant, has been supplied with the stormer with I from around 2008 to April 2014. On April 201, 201, G, the business operator of I, who is the first police officer, "I, should pay the unit price of the winder, because the price of the clicker's metal material, which is the clicker's component, has increased," and that "I, as the clicker's business operator, has been produced from around April 111, 201 to April 22, 2014, it is deemed that I would have received approximately KRW 37,170,100 and the delivery of the clicker's property damage."

However, due to the increase in the same value from G around 2008, the Defendant was notified that he had produced a fluor as a co-day with the same aluminium, and was supplied a fluor. Therefore, there was no deception from F and G.

Nevertheless, on May 20, 2014, the Defendant submitted a written complaint to a police officer whose name is not known at the Macheon Police Station civil petition office located in the Macheon-si, Macheon-si, 1570, to the police officer who was unable to know his name. F and G were free.

2. The Defendant’s statement in F and G’s investigative agencies and this Court is admissible as evidence to the effect that the Defendant was notified that he was produced as a coins with Aluminium (hereinafter “CC coins”) due to the increase in the same value from G around 2008, and received the mother’s supply after being notified that he was supplied with it.

Co., Ltd. I.

arrow