All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. In light of the credibility of the statement in the second police interrogation protocol that the Defendants sold the instant mobile phone to a police officer on September 2012, 2012, the court below acquitted the Defendants of all the charges of this case, despite the fact that the Defendants acquired two cell phoness of this case, which are stolen goods, by gross negligence as stated in the facts charged, on the contrary, although the court below acquitted the Defendants of all the charges of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion

2. Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records of this case, in light of various circumstances acknowledged by the court below, there is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge that the defendants acquired stolen goods by gross negligence as stated in the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise. Thus, the fact-finding and judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendants for this reason is just and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as pointed out by the prosecutor of the judgment below. Thus, the prosecutor's assertion about this is without merit.

3. If so, the Prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendants is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.