Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants.

2. The finding of guilt in a criminal trial ought to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is any doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it shall be determined with the benefit of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do2342, Jun. 24, 2005). Considering the facts and circumstances cited by the judgment below and the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, it is difficult to acknowledge the credibility of the statement by the complainants who seem to conform to the facts in the instant case, and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that the facts in the instant case are proven to the extent that the reasonable doubt is excluded

Therefore, the court below's finding the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts as pointed out by the prosecutor in the judgment below.

shall not be deemed to exist.

① The complainant stated that the Defendants were the actual sellers of the instant sales contract.

However, the complainant appears to have considerable knowledge of real estate transaction as a real estate intermediary. The ownership of the instant building and site was made in the name of the Defendants or third parties, not K, and the said sales contract was concluded in the name of K entrusted with the authority to sell, and KRW 10 million transferred to the Defendant B account before the sales contract.