Although the defendant deceivings the victim G by deceiving him as in the facts charged, the court below acquitted the defendant 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.

The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that: (a) the statement made by the investigation agency I and F, which is an executive officer of the D Co., Ltd., in line with the facts charged, appears to have been made by conjection under the terms and conditions of the sales contract between D Co., Ltd. and C Co., Ltd.; and (b) recognized the circumstances as stated in the lower court’s holding in full view of the current status of the testimony made by the witness J, F, the lower court and the investigation agency; and (c) recognized the circumstances as stated in the lower court’s holding in its reasoning in view of the current status of the payment of the purchase amount of the C Co., Ltd. and the payment of the balance that should be paid to D Co., Ltd.

Examining this judgment of the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined, the judgment is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of law by misunderstanding facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

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