점유이탈물횡령
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the prosecutor as to the gist of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant acquired smartphones from the victim with an intention to obtain unlawful acquisition can be sufficiently recognized as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction, it is doubtful that the defendant is guilty even if there is no evidence to establish such a conviction.
Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.
(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do4305 delivered on February 25, 2000, etc.). B.
In light of the above legal principles, a thorough examination of the evidence of this case in light of the records, it is insufficient to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was proven without reasonable doubt that the defendant had intent to obtain the cellular phone at the time and place indicated in the facts charged, and it constitutes a time when there is no proof of crime. Thus, the judgment of innocence is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.
The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal 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.