beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. Around 13:00 on March 15, 2013, the Defendant drafted a false statement of accusation against C to the effect that he/she suffered assault from C in the documents of the accusation form that he/she had been kept in the public service center of the South-do Police Station at the same time 20-15, Namyang-si, the South-do Police Station at 20-15, respectively.
In full view of the contents of the complaint and the statement on supplement of the complainant, the following facts: “In the case of the defendant, at around 22:00 on March 4, 2013, the defendant C, who was the defendant, committed an assault to the concrete floor, such as smuggling and sprinking it into the concrete floor, etc., by cutting down the fat, which is the defendant, at around 2:00 on March 4, 2013, the defendant was punished.” The facts are as follows: “In the case of the defendant, the defendant heards the anti-end and breathth, and breath, he took a part of the part of the defendant’s left snow, which requires approximately 4 weeks of medical treatment, and there was no fact that C used the defendant as a fating and spating the defendant on the floor, and there was no assault that C did not have taken part in the part of the defendant.
Nevertheless, the defendant submitted the above complaint to the police officer who is unable to know his name in the public service center of the Namyang Police Station on the same day, and received the statement from the police officer F in the criminal charge of the Namyang Police Station and the integrated criminal1 team office, and made a supplementary statement to the complainant.
As a result, the defendant was arrested for the purpose of having C receive criminal punishment.
2. The defendant asserts that the judgment of this court has consistently been affected by C, such as the statement in the complaint, since the police to this court.
Therefore, as evidence consistent with the facts charged, C’s statement to the effect that “self-defense has no means of assaulting the Defendant,” and that “C has not observed the face of assaulting the Defendant,” the location of the instant case, E-state, the E-state where the instant case occurred.”
However, the evidence that corresponds to the defendant's assertion is consistent with the defendant at the time of the instant case.