logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 영월지원 2017.05.30 2016고단409
무고
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On July 7, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to 8 years of imprisonment with prison labor for rape, etc. at the Youngcheon District Court’s Young-gu branch on January 25, 2017, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

[2] On June 1, 2016, the Defendant prepared a false complaint against D in the Young-gu prison which is located in the gap between the sale of Young-gu, Young-gu, Gangwon-do, Young-gu, Young-gu, and Young-gu, Young-gu.

The defendant's complaint "(D) around January 2015, 2015, after putting a computer owned by the defendant in his/her own ward in his/her own ward, Gangwon-gun E detached House, and thereby stealing his/her punishment by any means." In fact, D had the above computer with the defendant's permission, so it did not steals the computer owned by the defendant.

Nevertheless, on June 10, 2016, the Defendant sent a false complaint to the above prison by mail, and submitted it to the police officer in the name of the police station in the name of the Gangwon-gu Jeong-gun, the Jongwon-gun, the Seowon-gun.

Accordingly, the defendant had D without the purpose of having D receive criminal punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Each police statement made against the defendant or F;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspects of D;

1. Investigation report (to hear statements from a witness G phone);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant Article 156 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes: Provided, That the judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 39(1)

1. The assertion D is true that it would bring a computer without the consent of the defendant, and thus is not a false complaint.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the Defendant filed a false complaint against D

It is reasonable to view it.

(1) D is the defendant who is using a relatively consistent computer from investigative agencies to the court.

arrow