The part concerning Defendant B in the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed in entirety.

Defendant

B. Imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (misunderstanding of the facts against the judgment of the court below of first instance and misapprehension of the legal principles) did not inflict an injury on the victim D, and even if the victim suffered from the process of leaving the Defendant’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’

B. The Defendants (the judgment of the court below of the second instance) 1 did not have been suffering from mental illness to the extent of hospitalization in the mental hospital, but D had the signature of the Defendant A in the written consent of hospitalization by deceiving the Defendant B, who is the mother of the Defendant A, and used this to place the Defendant A in the mental hospital.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below did not forced the defendant A to be hospitalized, and the defendants filed a false complaint for the purpose of having D receive criminal punishment.

Since it has recognized the crime of false accusation and sentenced it, there is an error of mistake of fact.

2) The sentence of the 2nd sentence of the Sentencing Decision (the 6 months of imprisonment with labor for Defendant A, the 1 year of suspended sentence, the 10 months of imprisonment with labor for Defendant B, the 3 years of suspended sentence, the observation of protection) is too unreasonable.

(c)

The 2nd judgment decision of the prosecutor is unfair because it is too unhued.

2. Before examining the reasoning for ex officio appeal as to Defendant B’s reasons for appeal, this Court tried by combining each of the appeals cases against the judgment below. Of the judgment of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance, each of the offenses against Defendant B among the judgment of the court of second instance is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the part on Defendant B among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance

However, despite such reasons for ex officio reversal, Defendant B’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to Defendant B’s 1’s judgment and misunderstanding of facts as to the judgment of the second instance is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Defendant B-.