The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment of the court below against the defendant (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

It is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court solely on the ground that the sentencing of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). According to the foregoing legal doctrine, the following conditions are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects it; (b) the Defendant did not have any significant result upon withdrawal of the instant complaint at an early stage during the investigation stage; (c) the Defendant wanted the Defendant’s wife; and (d) the Defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment exceeding the previous or fine.

However, the crime of false accusation is a crime that harms the criminal justice function of the State and is in danger of being subject to unfair punishment, and thus requires strict punishment. In light of the contents and degree of the defendant's complaint, the liability cannot be deemed to be less than that of the crime. Due to the defendant's act of false accusation, the victim was subject to investigation or investigation by the judicial authority and the fact that the judicial resources and human resources were wasted unnecessary is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of the following: (a) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original court because new sentencing data have not been submitted in the trial; and (b) other factors of sentencing as shown in the argument in the instant case, such as the background of the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, etc., the sentence of the lower court is within the scope of the discretion of sentencing granted to the lower court