The nature of the crime of false accusation in a case where the report was made in accordance with objective facts but the subjective evaluation of law was wrong (negative)

The term "false" in the crime of false accusation refers to a violation of objective facts, and the intention requires the awareness of this falsity, so long as an objective fact is reported as he knows, it cannot be viewed as a report of false facts even if there was a subjective, legal composition, or evaluation based on objective facts.

Article 156 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 83Do2410 Decided May 29, 1984 Supreme Court Decision 83Do2692 Decided July 24, 1984

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Shin Jae-in

Busan District Court Decision 83No1744 delivered on June 29, 1984

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal by defense counsel are examined.

1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the first instance judgment maintained by the lower court, the lower court affirmed the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant constituted a so-called crime of false accusation on the ground that the Defendant was guilty on the ground that: (a) on September 1981, 1981, Nonindicted 3 and Nonindicted 3, who was acquired and kept in the market with Nonindicted 1 and 2, made a resolution to dispose of it to Nonindicted 3 and to prepare money to be used as the proceeds of public sale; and (b) Nonindicted 3 reported that the disposal of 27 tons of the instant scrap metal to Nonindicted 4 was committed in collusion with Nonindicted 1 and thereby, it was false that Nonindicted 3 reported that it was a theft of the disposal of 27 tons of the instant scrap metal to Nonindicted 4.

2. The false statement in the crime of false accusation refers to a false statement contrary to objective facts, and its intention requires awareness of this falsity. Thus, as long as the defendant reports objective facts as he knows, it does not constitute a report of false facts, even if he erred in the subjective legal composition or evaluation based on objective facts, it does not constitute a crime of false accusation. In light of the records, the evidence at the time of the judgment of the court below, in light of the records, the resolution of request for disposition was adopted and the defendant reported (the statement at the time of preparation of the police statement) without disclosing the above resolution, can be recognized. Accordingly, it is not unlawful in violation of the rules of evidence as pointed out in the arguments.

However, according to the records, Non-Indicted 3 acquired with Non-Indicted 1 and 2 and entrusted with the custody of the above 40 tons of scrap metal in the open container, and entrusted with the custody of 27 tons in the open container under Non-Indicted 1's order, and then disposed of it as payment in kind to Non-Indicted 4 at that time, but refused to do so. Thus, it can be acknowledged that Non-Indicted 1 and 3 reported the fact that the above 27 tons of scrap metal were sold to Non-Indicted 4 and disposed of, and it was difficult to find that the above 27 tons of scrap metal were disposed of, and that the above 1 and 3 did not constitute the crime of larceny, regardless of the above resolution (the above 40 tons of scrap metal kept by the above 3 et al.). Thus, if the court below did not know that the above 3's act of disposal was in violation of the law of larceny and thus, it constitutes a so-called subjective resolution of the defendant's disposal of the above 3's obligation.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Jeong Jong-tae (Presiding Justice)