The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The Daegu High Court decided to institute a public prosecution even though other important evidence was not found in the case where the dismissal ruling of the previous application for a public prosecution became final and conclusive. The above decision is illegal and unfair in violation of the legislative intent of Article 262(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the indictment of this case according to the above decision is also inconsistent with the law.

2) At the time of the production of a prior publication, there was an agreement between the Defendant and the victim that “the Defendant, a representative author, will work for all matters concerning publication including the distribution of royalties, and if the publication would be omitted from the revision work, he will delegate the right to advance to the remaining author except the name of the author, so it is not recognized that the Defendant’s infringement of the Defendant’s right to property and the Defendant’s intent of infringement of property rights is not recognized.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to Article 262(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, if the court accepted an application for adjudication and rendered a decision of prosecution, the public prosecutor of the public prosecutor’s office who received the written decision of adjudication pursuant to Article 262(6) bears the duty to institute a public prosecution. In light of the above legal text, even if other important evidence was not newly discovered during the trial, the court rendered a decision of prosecution by citing the application for adjudication of the same case as the case for which the previous decision of dismissal became final and conclusive even if other important evidence was not newly discovered during the trial.

Even if there were such reasons, the above decision and the prosecution accordingly cannot be deemed unlawful.

Examining these judgments of the court below closely by comparing them with records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable.