logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.12.27 2017고정272
무고
Text

The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. On October 13, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for interference with business in the Daegu District Court racing support, etc. and the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 8, 2017.

On April 20, 2016, the Defendant, on April 20, 201.

C. At the home of the defendant's apartment No. 103 Dong 104, 104, one copy of the complaint against E was prepared for the purpose of having E receive criminal punishment.

The defendant appears to be a clerical error in the indictment on February 18, 2016, "13." 18."

On March 15, 2016, there is no fact that E used a assault against a defendant on March 15, 2016.

Nevertheless, on April 20, 2016, the defendant submitted a letter of complaint to the racing police station located in the racing market, and rejected E.

2. Determination:

A. The crime of false accusation is established when the reported fact goes against the objective truth with the intention of having another person subject to criminal punishment or disciplinary disposition. The requirement that the reported fact goes against the objective fact requires positive proof. The crime of false accusation cannot be established by readily concluding that the reported fact goes against the objective truth solely with the passive proof that the authenticity of the reported fact cannot be recognized (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4642, May 25, 2006). However, if there is no room for doubt that the reported fact is false, it shall be deemed that there is no proof if it is insufficient to readily conclude that it is false (see Supreme Court Decision 85Do1980, Nov. 12, 1985, etc.). In addition, in a criminal trial, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the criminal facts charged in a single criminal trial, and even if there is no proof of probative value that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, it should be proven against the defendant.

arrow