Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict on the facts charged of this case on the ground that there is insufficient proof, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Around February 2014, the Defendant: (a) knew of the facts charged in the instant case, the victim B (the age of 80) was unable to determine as the aged; (b) was aware that the victim’s father was receiving the survivors’ pension; (c) was at risk of cancelling the designation of the person of distinguished services to the national independence; and (d) was committed as if the Defendant had the ability to resolve it by negotiating with the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs; and (c) was able to obtain money by deceiving the victim.

On February 2, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The designation of a person of distinguished services to the national independence is revoked in the course of the designation of his or her father-child or a person of distinguished services to the national independence, his or her funeral expenses are removed, and the bereaved family pension has been recovered so far.”

However, the defendant did not know whether the designation of the person of distinguished services to the national independence was revoked or in this connection there was no intention or ability to negotiate with the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs.

Around February 24, 2014, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received five million won from the victim to the single bank account under the name of the Defendant, and received the total sum of 147 million won from around August 17, 2016 of the lower judgment, from around 39 times to around August 17, 2016.

3. Determination

A. The prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial.