1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. On September 29, 2014, the Plaintiff accused the Defendant on the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion that “the Defendant appeared as a witness on the date of pleading in the Seoul Central District Court case No. 2012Gadan268800, Apr. 17, 2013, and raised perjury.”

Accordingly, with respect to the defendant's charge of perjury, the prosecutor, who was suspected of having committed a non-prosecution disposition on September 22, 2015, against the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office 2014 type 5857.

After that, on April 11, 2016, the Defendant filed a complaint with the Plaintiff on the summary of the “the Plaintiff filed a criminal charge against the Defendant on September 29, 2014.”

With respect to the case of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office 2016-type 33291 against the plaintiff's suspicion, the prosecutor issued a non-prosecution disposition on July 28, 2016.

In light of the fact that the Defendant’s accusation against the Plaintiff on April 11, 2016, issued a non-prosecution disposition (defluence of evidence) against the prosecutor’s accusation against the Defendant, the Defendant’s accusation against April 11, 2016, proved that the Defendant’s accusation against the Plaintiff was false and groundless.

The plaintiff suffered enormous mental damage due to the defendant's complaint filed on April 11, 2016, which constitutes a tort under the Civil Act, and the defendant is obligated to pay consolation money of KRW 31,00,000 and delay damages to the plaintiff.

B. We examine all the evidence presented at the argument of this case, while it is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant’s complaint of April 11, 2016 was false and thus, the Plaintiff’s complaint of this case was rejected. However, according to the lower court’s evidence No. 4 and No. 2, according to the lower court’s reasoning, the prosecutor determined that it is difficult for the Defendant to recognize the Defendant’s accusation of April 11, 2016. Accordingly, it is difficult to accept the Plaintiff’s claim of this case.

2. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.