A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

While the Defendant complained of spawn, etc. of 47, the Defendant got from the dental room located in the official prison, which was located in 21-45, a long-term, Sinju-si on May 15, 2014, the dental room located in the official prison, and received from C the treatment of spawn’s spawn’s spawn’s spawn’s spawn’s 48, the Defendant’s explanation was sought that the spawn’s spathn’s spawn’s spathn’s spathn’s spawn’s spathn’s spat

Nevertheless, around May 19, 2014, the Defendant drafted a false complaint stating that “The Defendant Defendant C, at around May 15, 2014, expressed his/her intention of refusal several times at the dental room located in an official prison, but, without his/her consent, he/she extracted No. 48 of the complainant.” On May 20, 2014, through the staff of the said official prison, the Defendant submitted the above complaint to the official branch office of the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office.

As a result, the defendant was arrested for the purpose of having C receive criminal punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Entry of C and D's statement in the suspect examination protocol of the prosecution against C and part of A among the interrogation protocol of the prosecution;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding C;

1. C’s statement;

1. The chief of a complaint, and coal applications;

1. -a copy of work report, - a photograph of a baby, medical record, and medical record;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of an investigation report (Attachment to the Appellant);

1. The pertinent Article of the Criminal Act and Article 156 of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts, and the Defendant actively demanded C to leave the love No. 48, but C voluntarily asked C to leave the love No. 48, so the Defendant’s complaint is not false.

However, the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence of the ruling, are ① the defendant was recommended by the first C to receive preservation treatment at 47 times from the first C, and the defendant was actively demanded to take custody on the ground of the prison. ②