The appeal by the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

purport, purport, and.

1. The court of first instance dismissed both the plaintiff's principal claim and the defendant's counterclaim, and only the plaintiff appealed, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the plaintiff's principal claim.

2. Although the Plaintiff did not rape the Defendant, the Defendant reported false rape against the Plaintiff. As a result, the Plaintiff suffered from mental pain and defamation, thereby causing loss, such as degradation of business ability, and deterioration of health.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 10 million won and damages for delay as active, passive, and mental damages.

3. Determination

A. Even if the complainant was subject to an investigation due to the suspected fact that the complainant filed a complaint and received a disposition of non-guilty suspicion, insofar as the accusation is not by intention or gross negligence to the extent that it is recognizable as abuse of right, the complainant’s act cannot be readily concluded as tort (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da46360, Apr. 12, 2007). Determination of whether the complainant’s intentional act or negligence was committed ought to be made on the basis of good manager’s care in light of all the evidence and circumstances revealed in the record.

(See Supreme Court Decision 95Da45897 delivered on May 10, 1996). B.

According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and Eul evidence No. 3, the defendant filed a complaint for rape around May 2018, and the plaintiff was found to have received a non-prosecution disposition by the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office on January 16, 2019, but it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant's criminal complaint against the plaintiff was caused by intention or gross negligence to the extent that the defendant's criminal complaint against the plaintiff was recognized as abuse of his/her right, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff sought damages on the premise that the defendant's criminal complaint constitutes a tort.