The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On December 23, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around December 23, 2013, prepared a false complaint with respect to C using a computer for civil petitioners at the public service center of the military police station located in the Si/Gun/Gu amam3.1, 82.

The written complaint states that "the defendant C, who was the defendant, was in charge of tissue recovery on December 23, 2013 without the defendant's consent from the E Hospital located in Gunsan-si D, and thus the defendant was injured by the defendant," and the facts are as follows: "A written consent to tissue recovery" including the contents of "on-the-spot internal and organizational inspection of the above Minister" before undergoing the internal border inspection; thus, C, the defendant, was not in charge of tissue recovery without the consent of the defendant, and therefore, C, the defendant, was not in charge of causing injury to the defendant by collecting tissue.

Nevertheless, on December 23, 2013, the defendant submitted a false complaint to a public official who is unable to know his name in the above military police station civil petition office.

As a result, the defendant was arrested for the purpose of having C receive criminal punishment.

2. In the crime of false accusation, a report refers to a report that is filed without recognizing that the fact of report is false or having no conviction that the fact of report is true. Therefore, even if it is inconsistent with objective facts, a false accusation is not established if the reporting person is true and reported as true, and this is true.

reported means that there is no perception that the reported facts may be false, that is, dolusence.

(Supreme Court Decision 88Do99 delivered on September 27, 198). According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, even though the Defendant signed the “written consent for internal border treatment” including the “written consent for internal border treatment and organizational inspection” before undergoing the internal border examination, it is recognized that the Defendant submitted a false statement, such as the facts charged, even though the Defendant signed the “written consent for internal border treatment.”

However, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the defendant, it is known.