Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged.

2. The lower court determined that the instant facts charged was acquitted on the ground that it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant withdrawn the money deposited in the Defendant’s name account to facilitate the commission of the crime with the knowledge of the crime committed by the false names, etc., on the sole basis of the evidence presented by the prosecutor, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the prosecutor.

In full view of the circumstances indicated by the court below and the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence, namely, the E account in the name of the defendant was opened five years prior to the use of the benefit account, and the defendant was expressed in daily uniforms without care due to her face, her mother, scke, and scke, etc. when withdrawing and remitting money deposited by the defendant, the judgment of the court below not guilty of the facts charged of this case on the grounds as stated in its holding is justified, and since no new evidence corresponding to the facts charged of this case was submitted at the court below, it is not deemed that there was an error of law by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the prosecutor, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.