2. Determination

A. According to the evidence of the judgment on the fraud, the fact that Defendant A requested QPP center to repair the replacement of the cell phone value, and the cell phone value was fixed in a foreign country, not fixed goods, may be acknowledged. However, in full view of the following circumstances, the above facts and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone are insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Defendants conspired to commit the instant fraud, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the prosecutor's allegation of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

① As the court below explained in detail in the reasons for innocence, there is no evidence or circumstance to deem that there is no method or standard to distinguish between domestic and foreign liquid values during the period in which the instant case occurred, and thus, it is difficult to deem that the Defendants were either domestic or foreign liquid values, and that they conspired to commit a crime. Furthermore, there is no evidence or circumstance to deem that Defendant A notified 10 other Defendants, including Defendant B, etc. (hereinafter “Defendant B, etc.”) of the fact that Defendant A, a mobile phone repair engineer, was attached with foreign liquid values to the cell phone in advance.

② According to CCTV images (No. 843 pages of evidence No. 3) in which Defendant B, etc.’s work images were taken, the fact that Defendants A and other Defendants were exchanged with each other with each other in a liquid manner can be discovered. However, as the Defendants asserted, it is possible to clean the existing liquid body or repair the cell phone using the existing liquid body, separate from the original repair body.