The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The Defendant is a person who is the representative of the two occupants (from November 1, 201 to October 31, 201) of Suwon-gu apartment complex C at Suwon-si, and D is a person who is the head of the above apartment management site (from July 20, 2012 to June 20, 2013).

On January 28, 2015, the Defendant submitted a written complaint to the civil petition office of the Suwon-si Police Station of the Suwon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Metropolitan Government 873-4, which submitted to the police officer in charge the following purport: “D, the former managing director of the C apartment, concluded a defective repair contract with E around August 10, 2012, entered into a construction contract for the above apartment, and forged and exercised a construction contract under the name of the former resident, which is the representative of the Gu resident.” On the same day, the Defendant was investigated as the complainant at the police station investigation and the F office around the 29th of the same month, and stated to G with the same purport, but the above construction contract was directly prepared by the Defendant.

Nevertheless, the defendant filed a false complaint with the intent of having the above D subject to criminal punishment, and made a statement to the effect that the above D would be punished.

2. Determination

A. The crime of false accusation is established when a person reports false facts to a public office or a public official for the purpose of having a criminal or disciplinary punishment imposed upon another person. Here, the term "a false report" refers to a conclusive or dolusent recognition that reported facts are contrary to objective facts, and even if the reported facts are false contrary to objective facts, if there is no awareness of such falsity, it shall be deemed that there is no intention to make a false accusation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 95Do231, Dec. 5, 1995; 9Do822, Nov. 24, 200). Meanwhile, the burden of proof for the crime prosecuted in a criminal trial exists in the prosecutor, and the recognition of guilt is sufficient to have a judge make a reasonable doubt.