logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2012.08.24 2012노1000
무고
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the defendant filed a false complaint with C to the effect that C intended to commit rape in the previous case despite the fact that C was in physical contact under mutual agreement with C, and that C had attempted to commit rape, and the staff D of the Incheon Probation Office had prevented C from filing such false complaint and had been convicted of committing a final judgment of conviction. Thus, the defendant filed a false complaint with C in the instant case without accusation and with D as an unaided teacher is not deemed to have filed a false complaint.

2. The fact that a criminal judgment already became final and conclusive on the same factual basis of the judgment on the grounds of appeal is material evidence, and thus, it cannot be recognized that there is no special change in circumstances that it is difficult to adopt a decision on the facts of the criminal trial, unless there is a change in circumstances.

(2) The court below found the Defendant guilty of having committed rape on September 24, 2012 and sentenced the Defendant to three years of imprisonment with labor for the following reasons: (a) the Defendant and the Prosecutor appealed each of the previous final judgment; (b) the Defendant filed a complaint against the Defendant seeking rape; and (c) the Defendant did not commit rape for the same reason as in the instant case; (d) on September 23, 2011, the Incheon District Court 201No429 Decided September 24, 201: (a) the Defendant was guilty of having attempted to rape C; (b) the Defendant and the Prosecutor appealed each of the final judgment, but all of the appeals filed by the Defendant and the Prosecutor were dismissed on February 3, 2012 by the Seoul High Court 201No2898; (b) the Defendant appealed on February 24, 2012, but the judgment of the court below rendered a final and conclusive judgment on May 24, 2012.

However, the defendant's intention to dispute in this case is the defendant in the previous final judgment.

arrow