The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor 1) erroneous determination of facts, the defendant should be deemed to have no fact against C on August 24, 2012, and thus, it is obvious that the defendant filed a complaint against C with the view of being in accord with C. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the charge of false accusation is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts. 2) The court below's sentence (two years of suspended sentence in August, and probation) of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment and probation) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. On March 26, 2013, the summary of the facts charged in this part of the charges was prepared by the public service center of the Jeju Western Police Station in the Jeju Western Police Station in Jeju-do, Jeju-si, and submitted to a police officer under his name in the statement that “A, the Defendant, at around August 24, 2012, left head of the Defendant, left head of the Defendant, left head of the Defendant, left head of the Defendant, left head of the Defendant, but was punished for attempted murder because he did not brut the Defendant’s shoulder.” However, the Defendant did not have been aware of the fact that C was at the time of investigation, and the investigation was conducted on account of the Defendant’s fact that C was investigated, the Defendant was issued a medical certificate late on March 26, 2013 (hereinafter “instant complaint”).

As such, the Defendant submitted a complaint containing false contents on March 26, 2013, and made a statement on March 27, 2013 by stating the same contents at the police.

B. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged solely on the ground that C consistently stated that there was no fact in the process of investigation that the Defendant was deprived of the fact, and that the content of the instant complaint cannot be readily concluded to be false.

C. The following circumstances, i.e., the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below’s oral statement, which were acknowledged by C, i.e., the following circumstances: