2010Do10186 no accusation

Han ○

Seoul Residence

Prosecutor

Attorney omitted

Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2008No1334 Decided July 22, 2010

January 12, 2012

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The crime of false accusation is established when another person reports false facts to a public office or a public official for the purpose of having a criminal or disciplinary punishment. Here, the term " false facts" refers to the conclusive or dolusent recognition that reported facts are contrary to objective facts. Even if reported facts are false, if there is no awareness of such falsity, it cannot be recognized as false facts (see Supreme Court Decisions 98Do1949, Sept. 8, 1998; 2002Do5939, Jan. 24, 2003; 2002Do5939, Jan. 24, 2003). Whether reported facts are false or not should be determined according to the core or important contents of the reported facts in relation to the elements of the crime, and it shall be determined whether the reported facts constitute a crime of false accusation (see Supreme Court Decisions 91Do1950, Oct. 11, 199; 200Do7487, Feb. 10, 2006). 206.

In addition, as long as a reporter has reported objective facts as they are, it cannot be readily concluded that a crime of false accusation is established because only the subjective evaluation part of the legal assessment is removed and the subjective report is false (see Supreme Court Decisions 83Do2826, Mar. 27, 1984; 83Do3245, Jun. 25, 1985, etc.).

In light of the above legal principles and records, the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance which found the defendant guilty and acquitted the defendant of each of the charges of this case in light of the facts and circumstances as stated in its holding, since the circumstance of the defendant's complaint stated in each of the charges of this case is somewhat exaggeration or erroneous in the subjective evaluation of facts, it cannot be deemed that the crime of abuse of authority or abandonment of duty constitutes a false fact to the extent that the investigative agency demands the exercise of investigative authority. In addition, it is difficult to deem that the defendant had awareness of the falsity of the reported facts, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles or violation of the rules of evidence

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Min Il-young

Justices Kim Nung-hwan

Justices Noh Jeong-hee

Justices Lee In-bok