The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) Defendant’s accusation against Defendant C is true, and there is no accusation against Defendant C.

In other words, C brought at will the roll of the defendant and did not return it, and there is no difference between C and C that the defendant delivered to C the roll sight as interest for the gold borrowed.

2) The Defendant “C seems to have good visibility with the Defendant, and the Defendant seems to have good sight once.”

A criminal case was brought to the effect that the foregoing visibility was not returned after this study.

In light of the contents of such complaints, the Defendant merely filed a complaint against C’s act which cannot be subject to criminal punishment, and did not file a complaint against C’s act as a theft.

Therefore, the defendant is not guilty of false accusation.

B. In light of the fact that even if the facts charged in this case were to be found guilty, in light of the fact that the defendant fully repaid the obligation of KRW 100 million to C, the defendant is old, and the defendant lives in custody for a considerable period of time, the punishment sentenced by the court below (Article 1 of the judgment below: Imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months and 2 of the judgment below: Imprisonment with prison labor for 7 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant can fully recognize the fact that C has reported a false fact to the investigative agency as if C brought about visibility against the defendant's will, even though C had delivered roll director director clock with interest for KRW 100 million borrowed from C.

In addition, the court below rejected the defendant's argument that "the defendant's complaint does not constitute a crime of false accusation by itself," and the court below rejected such argument on the grounds of detailed reasoning. The court below's reasoning recognized by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below.