The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant: (a) borrowed KRW 7,000,000 from E without interest agreement in around 2002; (b) thereafter, paid KRW 5,00,000,000 as principal and interest; and (c) paid KRW 12,00,000 in total to E; and (d) repaid the Defendant’s debt to E in full.

Nevertheless, the defendant is found to have been additionally transferred from the account under the name of the limited company G to E, and the defendant has been jointly managed by the head of the Tong.

D There was no choice but to regard it as embezzlement in collusion with E.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, although the defendant did not have any intention of false accusation, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the crime of false accusation as to the assertion of facts, an intentional act is not required to be a conclusive intentional act and is sufficient to do so. If a reporter reports a fact that is not true, an intentional act is recognized as a crime of false accusation. It does not require conviction that the reported fact is false (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4642, May 25, 2006). The mere act of filing a report on the basis of inferred without conviction constitutes an act of false accusation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 82Do2060, Oct. 26, 1982). Examining the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the lower court and the trial court in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant only borrowed KRW 7,00,000 from E in around 202, and thereafter, the Defendant did not know that the Defendant would need to transfer money from E in total to EG (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant 20, etc.”).