Although Defendants were aware of the fact that the 7th chapter of the household check of this case was forged or exercised with dolusent recognition, the lower court acquitted the Defendants by misunderstanding the fact.

Judgment

The evidence that there is a crime in criminal procedure must be presented by the prosecutor, and the criminal facts must be proven by the judge to have high probability without reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form such a high probability, the defendant is suspected to be guilty even if there is no evidence to establish such a degree.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below in this case, it is acknowledged that the defendants paid 10,000 won to those who may know about personal information in an imminent situation and acquired 7 copies of the household check in this case. Such circumstances are doubtful as to whether the defendants were aware of the fact that the 7th chapter of the household check in this case was forged.

However, it is insufficient to readily conclude the Defendants’ criminal intent, and in light of the circumstances as stated by the lower court, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that the Defendants knew of the forgery.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case does not err by misapprehending the facts.

In conclusion, the appeal against the defendants by the prosecutor is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.