The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. According to the relevant evidence, such as CCTV images at the time of the appeal’s summary, the following facts are confirmed: (a) the Defendant was found guilty in the relevant case due to the testimony of I without credibility; and (b) the content of the instant complaint stating that “I reported false facts to I, thereby making a false accusation to the Defendant”; and (c) it is not false.”

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the premise that the contents of the complaint of this case are false, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or misconception of facts.

2. Determination

A. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the record reveals that the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on April 27, 2016 at the Seoul Southern District Court for the eight-month term of imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Southern District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 31, 2016. As above, since the crime without a final and conclusive judgment and the crime without a customs offense of this case are concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a sentence shall be determined in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the lower court’s judgment omitted such measures becomes unable to be maintained any more.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and the following is examined.

B. Although the Defendant alleged the same purport in the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and investigated, rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds of detailed reasons in the part on “the Defendant’s argument”.

Examining the lower court’s aforementioned factual findings and judgments by comparing them with the records, the instant facts charged against the Defendant.