Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt, to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction, it is doubtful that the defendant is guilty.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do4305 delivered on February 25, 2000, etc.). B.

In light of the above legal principles, a thorough examination of the evidence of this case in light of the records, the court below's reasoning that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, cannot be deemed as proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant deceivingd D, the holder of the document, and caused D to sign in the deposit order of each automatic transfer application of this case, and thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, it is just and acceptable to determine innocence, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

[D] He voluntarily appeared as a witness in the court of original instance, and "at the time of signing in a document, he has confirmed what content it is and signed (D Recording No. 10, 13)," and "the defendant has made his signature with the relevant document after clearly explaining who is named insurance, etc." (D Recording No. 15, and "the defendant shall always always present the contents of the document."