The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The original facts charged in the instant case stated as follows: “In the absence of any physical contact,” but the lower court, without going through the amendment process to the indictment, found the Defendant guilty by changing the facts charged to the effect that “The above C was fluoring the Defendant’s arms and fluoring them, or C was fluoring the Defendant’s door,” and thereby, it would substantially disadvantage the Defendant’s exercise of the right of defense.

In addition, the defendant thought that the victim's grandchildren are only his own, and the circumstances are somewhat exaggerationd, and there is no intention to do so.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Judgment

The amendment of the written indictment to the argument regarding the amendment of the indictment is permitted to the extent that does not harm the identity of the facts charged. Since the identity of the facts charged or the facts charged is a concept under the Criminal Procedure Act, this is required to consider the significance of the criminal procedure or the functions of the litigation law. Therefore, whether the basic facts of two crimes are identical or not can not be grasped solely from the purely social and all legal perspective without completely excluding the normative elements, and it is reasonable to view that the normative elements of the same natural, social, or defendant's act constitute a substantial part of the identity of basic facts.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 93Do2080 delivered on March 22, 1994, etc.). In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant had no intention to commit a crime of false accusation in the process of filing a report at the court below, that “the victim filed a false report to the police even though he did not have the Defendant’s chest.” In this case, the Defendant asserted that there was no intention to commit a crime of false accusation.