logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.02.03 2016노494
무고
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the above judgment is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. A. Around December 2003, the Defendant: (a) drafted a letter of payment stating that “IO creditor D will not raise an objection even if D disposes of the land, such as the Defendant’s return, which is the real estate, if I would not pay KRW 50 million to D by April 30, 2004.”

Han PartO delivered the documents necessary for the registration of ownership transfer in order to provide the real estate (Mosan-gun G, H, and 5 parcels) in the part of the above payment form to D, and in order to discard the above payment form no longer necessary, there was a fact that one of the Defendant, J, andO made the above payment form in his hand and then thrown the tear into the waste form.

In doing so, E collected the letter of payment of this case as above, and then adjusted the tear tear part in order to reduce the tear, attached it to paper, and copied it to paper, and additionally inserted “the date of preparation on December 27, 2003” in the middle part of the copy as if the date of preparation was originally stated.

In collusion with D, on January 18, 2013, E filed an application for a payment order seeking payment of KRW 50 million with D and debtor J on the Cheongju District Law, and exercised it by submitting a copy of each payment document stating the date of the above preparation as evidence.

E The paper shall be posted in the first order after collecting the destroyed document, and the paper shall be reproduced and copied and then reproduced and submitted as evidence shall constitute forgery and alteration of the private document, litigation fraud, etc.

Therefore, it cannot be said that the defendant's act of filing a complaint against E and D due to the alteration of private documents, fraud in litigation, etc. constitutes a crime of false accusation.

On the other hand, when considering that the defendant received the documents related to the above payment order at the time when his memory was over ten (10) years from the date of the preparation of the above payment letter, the period of payment of KRW 50 million on April 30, 2004.

arrow