A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On December 2, 2013, the Defendant, at the end of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E-legal office, drafted a false complaint against F with the intent to have F punished criminal punishment.

The complaint states that "the defendant F, on June 19, 2013, raped the complainant in the her motherel located in G on the southyang-si on June 19, 2013," and that the facts were sexual intercourses under an agreement with F, and that F did not commit rape against the defendant.

On January 3, 2014, the Defendant submitted a written complaint to the public service center of the Seoul Dongdaemun Police Station located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul to raise F.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol concerning the examination of suspect concerning F by the prosecution;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (victim letter messages and voice messages);

1. Article 156 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 157, 153, and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to be legally mitigated;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The crime of false sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act requires strict punishment as a crime to protect the interests which are not subject to investigation or disciplinary action of an individual, and mental damage suffered by F due to the instant crime is reasonable.

However, F, who was in a personal relationship with the Defendant, filed a criminal complaint, and F, filed a civil lawsuit against the Defendant and filed a petition for violation of the Building Act against the Defendant. F, the Defendant committed the instant crime under extremely unstable psychological condition, the Defendant’sless criminal conduct was discovered at the investigation stage and did not cause serious damage, and the Defendant was living without any criminal record in the nearest state before the F. F. It reflects the fact that the Defendant lived with the F. F. It was against the fact that the Defendant was living without any criminal record, and 5 million won for F.