The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant intentionally made a false statement about the circumstances, place, etc. in which C was delivered in order to conceal the relationship with C; and (b) failed to properly understand the prosecutor’s examination purpose.

Although it cannot be deemed that a statement was made by mistake or mistake, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of judgment.

2. The following additional circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① even though the defendant did not return to Pyeongtaek-si with her natives before her delivery, the witness responded to the prosecutor’s drinking her "I had her friendship with her natives in the city of Pyeongtaek-si", which read, "I had her friendship with her natives in the city of Pyeongtaek-si", although the defendant was examined as the suspect's status and stated in the prosecutor’s office, it is difficult to conclude that the above testimony is contrary to the premise stated in the above facts charged, ② The defendant's testimony is difficult to conclude that the above testimony is against the aforementioned facts stated in the facts charged, ② the defendant's statement that "I had her drinking with her only one hour after her delivery in the park," and the purport of the defendant's testimony or statement to the effect that "I had never made her first or second oral drinking within the park," such as "I had never made a false statement to the effect that the defendant made her testimony or statement within the park."