beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The Defendant appeared at the Seoul Mapo Police Station on August 28, 2014, as the Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul, in the witness of the instant case on January 6, 2012, C, Seoul Western District Court 201 Godan 2309 Goo-gu, Seoul Western District Court 201 on January 6, 2012, as the witness of the instant case, and “Neine of the Defendant’s phone to the witness on September 201.”
It is replaced by a person who used to play dynac in dynac due to the change of dynac, hynac, and hynac, hynac, hynac.
It is necessary to find out whether or not there is any fact of intimidation. It is necessary to see whether or not there is any fact of intimidation.
The prosecutor’s question of “,” such as “Mymar,” must be put to the same time as “Mymar.”
A written complaint stating that “A false testimony was made” was submitted.
However, the facts are that the defendant was in a relationship with the police officer on September 201.
D When intending to be contacted, there was a fact that the phone phone called to C, who is his father, had been threatened with the above contents, and C knowingly submitted a false statement with knowledge that it was merely a testimony of the fact and that it was not proven.
After that, on May 1, 2015, the Defendant made a statement to the same effect as the written complaint while making a supplementary statement to the police officer F belonging to the Mapo Police Station investigation and E Team office.
In this respect, the defendant made a false accusation for the purpose of having C receive criminal punishment.
Summary of Evidence
1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;
1. C Protocol of examination of witness;
1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel of the investigation report (the attachment of the A's judgment attached to the complaint)
1. The summary of the argument is as follows: C
Notwithstanding the fact that C does not have been infected by the Defendant, that C did not have any food or water supply, it is true that C had such fact.
As such, the defendant did not file a false complaint.
2. The reasoning of the judgment revealed earlier.