The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case even though the Defendant did not recognize that the details of the complaint against G were false.

2. Determination

A. The crime of false accusation under Article 156 of the Criminal Act is established when a report of false facts is made to a public office or a public official for the purpose of having another person receive criminal punishment or disciplinary punishment. Here, the term “report of false facts” refers to a conclusive or dolusent recognition and reporting that reported facts are contrary to objective facts.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Do6347 Decided May 29, 2008, etc.). In addition, in relation to a false accusation, “the purpose for which criminal or disciplinary punishment is imposed” is sufficient when there is a perception that another person would be subject to criminal or disciplinary punishment in making a false report, and it does not require that another person would be subject to criminal or disciplinary punishment, and that the result thereof would have occurred. As long as the defendant submitted a written complaint to an investigation agency, such perception was

I would like to say.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4642 Decided May 25, 2006, etc.). B.

In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the following circumstances may be acknowledged, taking account of the falsity of the details of the complaint and the recognition of the Defendant’s identity as to it. The content of the written complaint (58 pages of the trial record) submitted by the Defendant to the District Public Prosecutor’s Office on June 10, 201 through the complainant’s agent, which was submitted by the Defendant to the Speaker’s Office on June 14, 201, and the “A (Defendant)” means land and buildings on the land and buildings (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of Gyeonggi-gun, Gyeonggi-gun, and four lots awarded jointly with G on October 22, 20

A certified judicial scrivener remitted KRW 63,374,70 to I as expenses for registration, and the above certified judicial scrivener transferred KRW 23,084,860 on October 23, 2009 on the following day, while he/she had remaining KRW 23,084,860 as a result of the completion of registration.