The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, even though the Defendant failed to receive the books applied for purchase during the number of B detention houses, the amount of custody equivalent to the purchase cost of books was deducted, and thus filed a complaint with related persons to be returned, and there was no intention to make a false accusation. Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles, or sentenced the Defendant guilty by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby rendering a judgment of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment). The lower

2. Around July 11, 2017, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case prepared a false complaint stating that “Around December 2016, the Defendant was unable to receive the book “Adok special lecture” (hereinafter “this book”) that the Defendant himself/herself applied for purchase from his/her own custody, even though he/she was unable to receive the book “Adok special lecture” (hereinafter “the book”) in the receipt of B detention house around December 2016, the Defendant conspired with the head of the detention house, the head of the general affairs division, and the person in charge of book purchase, etc. to embezzled his/her custody amount.” The Defendant submitted a false complaint to the public service center of the head of the Si/Gu/Eup/Myeon office of the previous district public prosecutor’s office located in Si/Eup/Myeon-dong, 9

However, in fact, the defendant received the original book from the correctional officer C, and received it lawfully, and there was no conspiracy between the head of B detention house, the head of general affairs division, the person in charge of book purchase, etc. and embezzled the amount held by the defendant.

Accordingly, the Defendant reported false facts to the Public Prosecutor's Office for the purpose of criminal punishment of F in charge of purchase of B detention house D, B detention house E, and B detention house book B.

3. 1) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented in its judgment. 2) According to the records of the instant court’s judgment, the Defendant applied for the purchase of the instant books in the B detention house in December 2, 2016, and ② C, a person in charge of the Defendant’s private consent admitted at the time, was the case on behalf of the Defendant on December 22, 2016.