logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.01.20 2015노3002
무고
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles requested D to repair a car using a car owned by the Defendant. After that, D did not inform D of accurate information about the location of the above vehicle, the Defendant became unable to know the location of the vehicle, and D filed a complaint on the grounds of suspicion that D did not dispose of the above vehicle at will. Thus, there are reasonable grounds for the Defendant to have such doubt.

Therefore, the defendant's intention is not recognized.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (2 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The criminal intent in the crime of false accusation as to the Defendant’s mistake of facts and the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine is not necessarily required to be a conclusive intentional but is also sufficient for dolusent intent. Therefore, the crime of false accusation is established by reporting the fact that the reporting person is not true, and it does not require conviction that the reported fact is false.

In addition, in the crime of false accusation, "the purpose of a criminal punishment or disciplinary measure" is sufficient when there is a perception that another person would be subject to criminal punishment or disciplinary measure due to a false report, and that the result is not required to have occurred. Thus, as long as the defendant submitted a written complaint to an investigation agency, such recognition should have been made (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4642, May 25, 2006, etc.). In accordance with the above legal principles, the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① from the investigation agency to the court below, the vehicle of the defendant from September 201 to October 200 to the court below.

arrow