A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On October 11, 2013, the Defendant drafted a false complaint against D with the intention of having D receive criminal punishment from the C Building 101, 905, Sacheon-si C Building 101.

The statement of the complaint states that "A false statement was made that D should take advantage of public funds at the F Hospital office located in Sacheon-si, Sacheon-si on August 18, 2010 and borrowed KRW 10 million but failed to pay it, so that D could be punished for fraud." The fact that D, as mentioned above, did not take the above, borrowed KRW 10 million by deceiving the defendant.

Nevertheless, on October 14, 2013, the Defendant submitted a written complaint to the police officer who was unable to know the name of the G District Department of the Private Police Station G District, and brought the complaint to D.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of D and H;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning H;

1. A complaint;

1. Copy of the judgment;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to an investigation report (Attachment to a report on examination of a suspect);

1. The pertinent Article of the Criminal Act and Article 156 of the Criminal Act regarding the Defendant’s assertion on criminal facts and the grounds for sentencing alleged that the Defendant actually lent KRW 10,00,000 to D, and thus, the Defendant did not report false facts. Accordingly, according to the copy of the statement of transactions submitted by the prosecutor, the Defendant was found to have remitted KRW 10,00,00 to the account under the name of D on August 18, 2010. However, even if the document of disposition was not completely prepared at that time, the document of disposition was not written. In light of the circumstances where the Defendant and D did not have a close relation to the degree that they did not prepare a loan certificate, etc., in light of the empirical rule, it is difficult to believe that the Defendant’s statement was made in light of the empirical rule, and according to the statement of D and H, the amount that the Defendant remitted to D was transferred to H during the process of partially repaying’s repayment to H by means of borrowing a large amount of debt to D.