The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) D and K’s statement, and the fact that the Defendants, as F, obtained the exclusive license for the patent of this case, was the most important factor in obtaining the exclusive license for the patent of this case, the Defendants, as stated in the facts charged of this case, obtained stocks and money from F in return for inducing F representative D to grant the exclusive license for the patent of this case, but the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the instant facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, acquitted.

1) The key issue of the instant case is whether the Defendants agreed to grant F the exclusive license of the patent of this case to F, and whether they agreed to obtain 4,000 shares of each victim company from F under the pretext of patent royalties (amounting to 5,000 won) and 4 million won per month. 2) The major evidence that seem to correspond to the instant facts charged is the e-mail (Evidence No. 2) sent by D and K investigative agencies and this court to D, and by L to D upon receipt from Defendant B, and the patent exclusive license agreement (Evidence No. 4) between Defendant A and the injured party (Evidence No. 4). However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record of the instant case were stated in the accusation statement and supplementary statement that “It was found that the Defendants conspired to transfer the patent right of this case to J and the accused, and thus, the Defendants were aware that the patent of this case would not grant the exclusive license of this case, or that they were deceiving the Defendants later.”