A. Whether a crime of false accusation is not established if the contents of the report include contents contrary to the truth, but merely exaggerations the circumstances

(b) The case holding that it cannot be deemed that the circumstance of the reported fact merely exaggerations the fact that the reported fact was reported by reporting false facts

A. In relation to “false facts” in the crime of false accusation, if it is merely an exaggeration of the circumstances of the reported fact, even though some of the details were included in the content contrary to objective truth, the crime of false accusation is not established.

B. The case holding that in a case where the Defendant’s fighting with the Defendant and the third party attempted to fighting with the Defendant, the Defendant’s fighting did not listen to the horses, and the Defendant’s satisf was only abandoned and reported next to the Defendant’s fighting, and the Defendant’s satisf was not affected by the Defendant’s fighting, but the Defendant’s fighting was also affected by the Defendant’s fighting with the third party’s satisfing, not by the Defendant’s satisfing with the third party’s satisfing, and it can be seen that the Defendant’s satisfing was injured by the Defendant’s satching, and the Defendant’s satisfing, not by the Defendant’s satching with the third party’s satisfing, it cannot be deemed that the entire contents of the satisfing with the objective truth in relation to the third party’s satisfing of the Defendant’s s report.

Article 156 of the Criminal Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 90Do1706 delivered on November 9, 1990 (Gong1991, 128) 93Do2995 delivered on January 11, 1994 (Gong194Sang, 748)

Defendant

Defendant

Changwon District Court Decision 94No897 delivered on November 4, 1994

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below found the defendant guilty of the crime of this case on the ground that the defendant's complaint that "the defendant's defendant's defendant's defendant's defendant's defendant's defendant's satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise sate sate sate sates at first, and the defendant's satise satise sate sate sate sate sate sate sate sate sate sate sate sate sate s

The issue is that the defendant at the time of packing with the non-indicted 1, even though he did not have committed violence or sustained bodily injury to the defendant at the time when the defendant was sealed with the non-indicted 1, unless the defendant was the fact that the defendant was fluoring the defendant's two arms, the above contents of the complaint are merely an exaggeration of the circumstances of the reported fact, and thus cannot be punished for non-indicted 1. In relation to the "false facts" in the crime of non-indicted 1, even though some of the reported contents are included in violation of the objective truth, if it is nothing more than an exaggeration of the circumstances of the reported fact, the crime of non-indicted 1 is not established. However, in this case, as duly determined by the court below, it was merely an exaggeration of the fact that the defendant attempted to fight with the non-indicted 1 and the defendant did not hear the words, and it was nothing more than an objective fact that the defendant suffered injury from the defendant's fluoral relationship with the non-indicted 1, but it can not be seen that the defendant suffered from the defendant's one's one injury.

In addition, the argument that the sentence of the court below is too heavy in this case where a sentence of less than 10 years is imposed against the defendant cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)