The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. At the time of the summary of the grounds for appeal, in light of the consistent statement of the victim and witness security guards, the circumstances leading up to the go beyond, and the statement of the security guards, etc., the court below found the facts charged of this case not guilty, and there is an error of law by mistake in the facts charged of this case.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendants not guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground that, in light of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, based on the evidence revealed in the records, it is difficult to recognize the fact that the victims and security guards conspired with each other in relation to the location of the Defendants and their security guards, and it is difficult to view it as a mere inconsistency with the statements on the part of the Defendants, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the Defendants conspired with the victim by believing the statements of the victims and security guards.

B. The judgment of the court below is proper in light of the following: (a) additional circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below; (b) there seems to have been many security guards in the vicinity of the damaged party at the time; (c) there seems to have been a little number of defendants (at the time of this case, Defendant A was 63 years old and Defendant B was 65 years old); and (d) it seems that it was difficult for the victims to believe only the statements of the victims and security guards because the victims were the victims who were married; (c) there was a lot of conflict with the occupants while the representative of the apartment occupants was in the position of the chairperson; and (d) the Defendants were deemed to have been opposed to the victims; and (e) there was no possibility of exaggerationing the statements.

In addition, the court below's finding of facts is clear in the first instance court.