A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor as to the first instance judgment, although Defendant A could fully recognize the fact that he alters and uses a real estate sales contract in the name of G as stated in the facts charged by the first instance court, the lower court acquitted the first instance court of the facts charged. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor against the judgment of the second instance, Defendant A and Defendant B conspired to commit the crime of fraud and breach of trust against the victim G and H as stated in the second instance judgment’s charges No. 1, and Defendant A committed each crime of breach of trust against the above victims as stated in paragraph (2) of the facts charged by the second instance court, but the lower court acquitted the second instance court of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. In the judgment criminal procedure, the evidence that there is a criminal fact must be presented by the prosecutor, and even if the indictment of the defendant is unreasonable and false, it cannot be disadvantageous to the defendant, and the proof of criminal fact should have a judge have a high probability to recognize it so that there is no reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form a conviction to such a degree, there is a doubt of guilt against the defendant even if there is no evidence to establish it.

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

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly examined in the lower court based on the following: (a) the lower court’s judgment and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a new trial based on the spirit of substantial direct examination adopted by our Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle; and (b) the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly examined in the lower court.