Since then, the defendant consistently stated to the effect that the contract of this case was forged to purchase the above heading room 35 million won or more, it is difficult to view that the market price of the heading room 35 million won or more at the time of the contract in light of the J's statement and the result of related civil litigation, and in light of the fact that the payment method of the above 35 million won by the defendant's assertion is considerably different from the transaction practice, but its contents are not stated in the contract of this case, there is credibility.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which rejected D’s reliable statement on different premise and acquitted each of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The court below found the defendant not guilty of each of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the above judgment of the court below is consistent with the records, and there is a violation of law by mistake of facts alleged by the prosecutor.

It shall not be readily concluded.

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