logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.04.08 2015노4019
무고
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles) The content of the accusation prepared and submitted by the Defendant is not false.

2) The Defendant did not recognize that the content of the accusation was false.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or legal principles 1) In a crime of false accusation, the criminal intent is not always conclusive but does not necessarily lead to dolusent intent. Thus, the crime of false accusation is established by reporting the fact that the reporting person is true, and it does not require conviction that the reported fact is false, and it does not require punishment for the other party, and the purpose of the accusation does not require that the reporting person be punished, and there is a difference in trial expenses.

On the other hand, it shall not be deemed that there is no intention to commit any crime of false accusation (see Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do774, Mar. 12, 2009; 2007Do1423, Apr. 26, 2007; 2007Do1423, Apr. 26, 2007; etc.). In addition, in a crime of false accusation, a report of false accusation refers to a conclusive or dolusent recognition and report that a reported fact goes against objective facts. Therefore, even if it is inconsistent with objective facts, if a reported person is confirmed as a true fact and made a report,

The report is false even if it is based on objective facts known to the reporter.

(2) If the reporting person is aware of the existence of a false or false fact, the reporting person is false on the basis of objective facts known to the reporting person.

Although recognizing that there is a possibility of being false or false, one's assertion is correct without disregarding it.

It does not include cases of thought (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2000Do1908, Jul. 4, 2000; 2006Do4255, Sept. 22, 2006). 2) The above legal principles.

arrow