The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are brought to the victim's discretion without properly checking who owns the damaged product of this case. Thus, the intention of larceny and intention of unlawful acquisition is recognized.

Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted the Defendant, it erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The court below stated to the effect that "G, the implementer of the construction site of this case, was not allowed to keep the damaged goods in the relevant place" in the court below, which is the following circumstances and acknowledged by the record. In full view of the fact that G did not have any possibility to mention the ownership of the damaged goods in this case to D and the defendant, etc. who followed the following, the court below was just in holding that there was no intention of larceny and illegal acquisition, and there was no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, such as the prosecutor's assertion.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.