The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles and improper sentencing)

A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal principles ① The Defendant, on October 14, 2008, set off loans of KRW 35 million and KRW 50 million against the Defendant of Gyeyang-gu, a person under no charge, and had the obligation to pay KRW 15 million. After then, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, etc. (hereinafter “relevant District Court 2012, 531, hereinafter “relevant District Court”), and filed a claim for the payment of KRW 50 million with the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant did not receive the guidance money from the Defendant’s standpoint. Accordingly, the Defendant did not make a false complaint that “the person under charge did not pay the guidance money on October 14, 2008.”

② With respect to the amount of KRW 39.8 million from the Defendant’s husband on February 14, 2010, the Defendant was paid since the Defendant offseted the said amount against the Defendant’s husband’s loan to E, which is the husband of the Defendant.

Therefore, it is not true that “the respondent did not pay a self-help on February 14, 2010” was not false.

(3) The above accusation is false.

Even if the defendant filed a complaint, the contents of the complaint are merely “the person who did not pay the guidance,” and it cannot be the cause of criminal punishment due to the nonperformance of civil liability, and thus, it does not constitute a crime of false accusation.

B. The defendant guilty.

However, considering that there have been a number of monetary transactions between the Defendant and the Defendant for a long time between the Defendant and the Defendant and his husband, there have been a large number of civil and criminal cases between the Defendant and his husband, which led to the Defendant’s accusation of the instant case, the lower court’s punishment (eight months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, one year of community service order, and 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The lower court’s judgment 1) In full view of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view the Defendant’s accusation as false.

(1)