The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal does not include retail stores and warehouse parts of the machinery (hereinafter “the instant machinery”) indicated in the facts charged in the instant lease agreement between the Defendant and the victim (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”), and the Defendant cannot be deemed to have acquired ownership by purchasing the instant machinery from the victim.

Nevertheless, the court below rejected the credibility of the victim's statement, and judged that the defendant acquired the ownership of the machinery of this case and disposed of it, and found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The additional prosecutor of the ancillary charge maintains the existing facts charged as the primary charge and maintains it as the primary charge, under the name of the conjunctive crime, “Embezzlement”, “Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act”, and the ancillary charges.

4.(a)

In addition, as stated in the paragraph, an application for permission to change the indictment was filed, and this court permitted to do so and added the subject of the adjudication.

However, despite the above changes in indictment, the argument of mistake of facts about the primary facts of the prosecutor is still subject to the judgment of this court, so the following is determined.

3. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The judgment of the court below is sufficient to interpret retail stores and warehouses equipped with the instant machine as the object of the instant lease agreement according to the family agreement concluded between the Defendant and the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation and the Defendant and the victim, and in comparison with the amount of the deposit money of the instant lease agreement, the said money is a deposit for facilities in the restaurant which is the object of the instant lease agreement.