The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the following, the summary of the grounds for appeal: (a) the general director G of the victim FF corporation, the representative director J’s investigation agency, or the first instance court’s statement has credibility; and (b) the Defendant, even if having received money from the victim as an advance payment for original purchase from the victim, could sufficiently be recognized that the Defendant defrauded the victim by deceiving the victim under the pretext of advance payment for original purchase, even though he did not have the intent or ability to supply originals of quality such as sampling presented to the

Nevertheless, the first instance court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by finding the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged.

2. Determination:

A. In full view of the facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the first instance court found the Defendant not guilty of the instant facts charged on the ground that, even if the Defendant received money from the victim as an advance payment for the purchase of original goods, it is difficult to view that it was proven to the extent that it was proven beyond reasonable doubt that the Defendant by deceiving the victim as an advance payment for the purchase of original goods, even though it did not have any intent or ability to supply quality as the sample that was presented to the victim, and that there was no other evidence to acknowledge it.

B. We examine the judgment of the first instance court in comparison with the evidence, and examine the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence, and examine the circumstances acknowledged by the court of first instance, and the circumstances where evidence to acknowledge the facts charged of this case was not submitted in the court of first instance, each statement in G, J’s investigation agency or court of first instance cannot be trusted as it is, and the evidence submitted otherwise by the prosecutor cannot be deemed as sufficiently proven to the extent that the facts charged of this case is beyond reasonable doubt, and thus, the defendant cannot be seen as having sufficiently proven to the