The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground that the defendant was installed at the new construction site of 747.4m2 (hereinafter "the land in this case") in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Yan-gu, Seoul, Inc., the representative director of the defendant, and G, a corporation performing construction works after the discontinuance of the construction in this case, did not have any evidence to regard that he occupied the above H beam beam, etc. in the victim H with a subcontractor and H beam beam installed, but the victim did not remove the above H beam beam in the wind in civil litigation while exercising the right of retention, and the defendant did not waive possession of the above H beam beam, and considering that the above H beam, etc. was installed at the place where the construction site in this case was managed and managed, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles or in the misapprehension of legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Addition of preliminary facts charged;

A. The prosecutor maintained the previous facts charged as the primary facts charged at the trial, and applied for the amendment of the indictment, which adds the following facts charged as the ancillary facts charged in the crime of embezzlement, and the subject of the trial was added by this court’s permission.

B. The Defendant, as the representative director of the Company D (former E), is the owner and implementer of the land at the F new construction site in the Seocho-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seocheon-gu. G (subcontractor) concluded the said contract with the said E and agreed to carry out the construction work at the said construction site. The victim H operated the said G (subcontractor) and the J (re-subcontractor).