beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Since the Defendant’s statement of performance was forged, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the crime of false accusation is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, even though the accusation against B was not false.
B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (a fine of five million won) is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, but the lower court found the Defendant guilty of a false accusation by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined, and rejected the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion on the grounds of detailed reasons in the part of “decision on the Defendant and his defense counsel
If the facts cited by the court below are added to the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the court below's fact-finding and judgment are justified, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the defendant.
① The written appraisal of appraiserO’s written appraisal of “P” and the written appraisal of “P” as stated in the land lease agreement (see, e.g., August 11, 2014) are different from each other, not with regard to whether the written appraisal result and the written appraisal of the Defendant’s name of the land lease agreement are mutually different, but with regard to whether the written appraisal of each of the above documents and the written appraisal of (i) the written appraisal of the Defendant’s name and (ii) the written appraisal of each of the documents are mutually different, and (ii) the written appraisal of each of the documents are different from the written one of subparagraphs 1, 2, and (iii) the written appraisal of each of the documents, and (iv) the written appraisal of each of the documents are different from the written one of subparagraphs 1, 2, 1, and 2. As long as the Defendant is recognized to have directly entered the land lease agreement, the above written appraisal result of the appraisal report cannot be deemed to have been mutually reliable, and (v) the same national appraisal report of the same object.