logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2013.08.07 2012고단1496
무고
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged and the Defendant and D are entering marriage on November 22, 2009, and the married couple reported on December 7, 2010, and D filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for divorce and a claim for the payment of solatium with the Suwon District Court for the payment of solatium around February 201, and is currently pending in the lawsuit.

On December 2, 2011, the Defendant made a false complaint with the intent of having D receive criminal punishment in order to assert the nullity of marriage with D during a divorce lawsuit, by forging the marriage report and filing a false complaint with D to the effect that D reported the marriage to the future of the Defendant.

The defendant's statement of complaint "A" was signed by the defendant's signature at will by arbitrarily forging the signature of the complainant and the complainant's parent and thus punished without the complainant's consent. The content or fact of "A" was directly signed by the defendant, and D reported the marriage with the consent of the defendant.

Nevertheless, the defendant submitted the above complaint to the police officer who could not know his name in the Korea Military Police Station on the same day and filed the complaint.

2. The defendant has never signed his/her name in the column for the wife of the report of marriage.

Therefore, the contents of the complaint are not false.

3. The evidence that seems to correspond to the facts charged in the instant case includes D’s legal statement and each statement in the investigative agency, and the appraisal statement in the protocol E prepared by the Chief of Supreme Prosecutors’ Office E.

First of all, the above appraisal document is examined about the above appraisal document, and the above appraisal document is not the defendant or D because it is not the case where it is proved that the completion of the written statement prepared by the defendant and D is the same as that of the written statement prepared by the investigative agency.

arrow