The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the misapprehension of the legal doctrine and the violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name are different from the form of an act and the protection of legal interests, the facts charged regarding the evasion of compulsory execution, which became final and conclusive by the verdict of innocence, and the part regarding the violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name among the facts charged in this case cannot be deemed identical

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below to dismiss the above parts is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unfluent and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the circumstances stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the aforementioned part was acquitted on the ground that the facts charged regarding the evasion of compulsory execution that became final and conclusive by the judgment of innocence and the facts charged regarding the violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name among the facts charged in the instant case, even if considering normative elements, the basic facts are identical and the res judicata effect of a final

Examining the above judgment of the court below by comparing it with the records, the judgment of the court below is just and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of misapprehension is without merit.

B. The instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing is recognized as having concealed the dividend of KRW 300 million for the purpose of evading compulsory execution by the Defendant, who bears the obligation to return deposit exceeding KRW 200 million against the victim, with the aim of evading compulsory execution, and the nature of such crime is not good, and the Defendant did not agree with the victim up to the trial of the party.

However, the Defendant was sentenced to the punishment due to the crime of evading compulsory execution related to the proceeds of the business of the wale, committed at the time near the date of the instant crime, and completed the execution of the sentence.