The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant did not file a false complaint with the lower court, and did not intend to commit a false accusation, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant facts charged by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of suspended execution in August, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The crime of false accusation is established when the reported fact goes against the objective truth with the intention of having another person subject to criminal punishment or disciplinary action. The requirement that the reported fact goes against the objective fact should be proven. The mere passive proof that the authenticity of the reported fact cannot be recognized is a false fact contrary to the objective truth, and thus the establishment of the crime of false accusation cannot be acknowledged (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4642, May 25, 2006, etc.). (2) The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below: (i) where the purchase price of a sales contract exceeds the actual purchase price (in the case of "one business medicine"), there is an additional burden, such as taxes, etc., on the seller; (ii) where the buyer demands for the preparation of the business contract; and (iii) where D is obligated to pay the remaining amount to the defendant in advance, and (iv) where D is actually obligated to pay the remaining amount to the defendant in advance.

It is clearly stated that L's statement made at the time of sale by proxy is consistent with it.