A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

On November 24, 2014, the Defendant prepared a false complaint with respect to C at the public service center of the Gu government police station located in 1265 as the House of the Government-Si of the Gu.

A written complaint was that “A around April 9, 2013, deceiving C to borrow KRW 44,00,000 from the complainants, and then the contact was terminated and the money was not repaid.”

However, in fact, the defendant lent D's friendship C through D, the wife, to D, KRW 40,00,000 on April 9, 2013, and all of the money lent through D on July 30, 2013, and the money returned to D, and made a re-investment in the business (E) that is conducted together with D.

Nevertheless, on November 24, 2014, the defendant submitted the above written complaint to the staff of the police station who is unable to know his name in the public service center of the above-mentioned government police station at the time due to the lack of time.

As a result, the Defendant reported false facts to public officials for the purpose of having C receive criminal punishment and filed a false complaint with C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and C;

1. The complainant, the copy of the loan certificate, the business registration certificate, the defendant and the defense counsel did not know that C repaid the borrowed money to D, and there is no fact that C invested in the business with D. Thus, it is difficult to see the contents of the complaint in this case as false, and the defendant did not have awareness of the falsity.

The following circumstances revealed by the evidence as seen above, namely, D, consistently with the investigative agency and this court, received reimbursement of KRW 40 million from C on July 30, 2013, and, upon notifying the Defendant of such facts, stated that the Defendant was given consent to the Defendant’s use of the E’s operating funds as the representative of the Defendant, and the Defendant was drafted as of April 21, 2014 with the obligor, but the Defendant’s wife was a monetary transaction.