2. The facts constituting an offense charged in a criminal trial should be proven by the prosecutor, and the judge should be convicted with evidence having probative value, which leads to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant, the interests of the defendant should be determined in the absence of such evidence.

(2) The court below held that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, on the grounds that the defendant's appearance of the act in this case was similar to that of the delivery or remittance for the crime of Bosing general Bosing, and thus, there is no doubt that the defendant had a criminal intent to acquire the defendant. However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, i.e., the defendant could not be ruled out that he had a criminal intent to acquire the defendant, without any doubt upon the request of the person who was originally related to C, because the defendant did not have to take the act without any doubt. (2) The defendant's role seems to be completed from the money exchange office to the president, and it is difficult to conclude that the defendant had a criminal intent to acquire the defendant, solely based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, on the following grounds: (a) the defendant had a friendly relationship with C, and was not related to the person who was first related to C, and (b) the defendant's act was not related to the transfer of money.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning closely by comparison, the lower court’s determination is justifiable and does not seem to have been erroneous.

. Prosecutors;