The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and misapprehension of legal principles)

A. The name of the owner on the registry of the mountain in mountain leased by the Defendant to C and its wife on the day of the instant case is determined C, but C actually manages it. The Defendant leased the mountain in mountain in question from C to manage it and harvested it at night.

In light of the fact that the Presidential Decree of the Republic of Korea permits night, submission by the Defendant of the accusation that “A and its wife, without the permission of the Defendant, committed a theft at night from the leased mountain by the Defendant’s wife at night” to an investigative agency constitutes a crime of false accusation.

B. Even if the Defendant, along with his son and her wife on the day of the instant case, did not permit the Security Department to take night in the mountain leased by the Defendant, the part stating that the Defendant, upon receiving the investigation from the complaint or the investigative agency, allowed C and her wife to take night, stated that the Security Department did not permit C and her wife to take night is false, and this part constitutes an independent crime or a crime of non-competence is established because it constitutes an alteration of the overall nature of the facts of the accusation with an important part affecting the nature of the offense, as it constitutes an alteration of the overall nature of the facts of accusation.

2. Determination

(a) Reasons for appeal;

As to the assertion of this case, in light of the fact that the defendant did not raise any particular problem for about five months from the time when the defendant started to night from the time when he leased with C and his wife, and that the defendant listened to C's warning that he will discontinue the management of the above mountain from G (the husband of the J, the owner in the above registry) who is an agent of C, and considered C to have ordered C to do so. In light of the fact that it led to the complaint of this case, it is doubtful that the defendant did not file a false complaint of this case even though he allowed C and his wife to take night from the child leased by the defendant together with his wife on the day of this case.