The meaning of "report of false facts" in a false accusation

Article 156 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 200Do1908, 2000Do62 Decided July 4, 200 (Gong2000Ha, 1855) Supreme Court Decision 95Do231 Decided December 5, 1995 (Gong196Sang, 313)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Lee Han-hoon

Suwon District Court Decision 2006No767 Decided June 8, 2006

The appeal shall be dismissed. The ninety days out of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel are examined together (if the supplemental appellate brief was not timely filed, to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief).

In the crime of false accusation, a report of false facts refers to a conclusive or dolusent recognition and report that the reported fact goes against the objective fact, and thus, even if it is inconsistent with the objective fact, if the reporting person is confirmed to be true and reported, the crime of false accusation shall not be established. However, the conviction in this context refers to the case where even if based on objective facts known to the reporting person, the reporting person cannot be aware that the reported fact is false, or that it is likely to be false, or that there is a false fact. It does not include a case where the reporting person knows that the reported fact is false or might be false based on objective facts known to him/her, but it does not include a case where he/she considers that his/her assertion is correct and correct (see Supreme Court Decision 200Do1908, 200Do62, Jul. 4, 200).

In full view of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, the court below acknowledged that the defendant submitted a written complaint to the investigative agency to the effect that he was punished for each of the crimes committed by Nonindicted 1 in his wife, Nonindicted 2, 3, and 4, as stated in its reasoning. While the defendant judged that the woman appearing on the Internet was Nonindicted 1, the defendant could not be aware of whether the woman appearing on the screen of the dynamic image attached to the complaint was Nonindicted 1, and it could not be known whether the woman appearing on the screen of the dynamic image was Nonindicted 1, and even if considering the dynamic CD itself, it could not be seen that the woman appearing on the dynamic image was not Nonindicted 1 in some of the images. Further, according to the above facts found, the defendant was found guilty of the defendant's fixed amount as a result of an appraisal on the suspension submitted to the prosecutor, and the defendant was found to have detected the defendant's fixed amount at the time of the complaint. However, the court below found the defendant guilty of the remaining facts of this case on the ground that it was sufficiently aware that there was no possibility of such a false fact.

In light of the above legal principles and records, the fact-finding and decision of the court below are just, and there is no error of law such as misconception of facts or incomplete deliberation due to violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of false accusation.

In addition, the argument that the punishment is too heavy cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where imprisonment for less than 10 years is imposed.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and part of the detention days after the appeal is included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Nung-hwan (Presiding Justice)