The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal did not err by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, although the defendant was unable to perform preparatory activities to resume the business of the victim D by taking full-time measures, the court below acquitted the charges of this case.

2. Determination

A. On June 17, 2008, the lower court acknowledged the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and examined: (1) D, from the Defendant on June 17, 2008, leased the second to fourth floor (hereinafter “instant building”) from among the commercial buildings owned by the Defendant in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, the term of lease from June 17, 2008 to June 17, 2013; (2) the Defendant was operating the first floor of the above building with a singing phone (mutual J: 2); (3) even after the first lease agreement, D and the Defendant agreed to share electricity 1/2; (4) from February 201 to November 201, 201, the Defendant was unable to use the first floor as a singing phone for which the first floor was operated; (5) from June 17, 2008 to June 17, 2013, the Defendant did not have been subject to the order of suspension of electrical business operation.

B. The following circumstances, which were duly admitted and examined by the court below, i.e., (i) stated that D was aware that electricity would cease at the end of February because it was the electrical power at court (the 40 pages of the trial record), and (ii) D.