The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a DNA vehicle borrower.

On May 21, 2017, the Defendant parked a vehicle in the parking lot located in the Geumdong-gu, Daegu Suwon-dong on May 21, 2017, and then the vehicle was stolen.

A false report was made to a public official on an unclaimed crime or accident.

2. We examine the facts charged. The evidence consistent with the facts charged is limited to the witness E’s legal statement, the vehicle theft report, the defendant’s statement, and the vehicle photograph, and each of the above evidence alone reported to the effect that the defendant was stolen of his/her own vehicle to the police. It can only be recognized that the above vehicle was discovered in the apartment parking lot in which the defendant is living, and it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant did not report the

B. A defendant is stolen and reported to the police, and is not so.

Even if there is a change in the fact that the Defendant’s vehicle was stolen and reported to the police, the mere fact that the security personnel immediately informed the location of the Defendant’s vehicle, cannot be readily concluded that there was an intentional act on the part of the police officer that the Defendant reported a false crime to the police officer under Article 3(3)2 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act.

Therefore, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered after the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the defendant does not consent to a public notice of acquittal, and thus, the summary of this judgment is not publicly announced pursuant to the proviso of Article 58(2)