The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The request of the applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) that the defendant moved to west to be exempted from the payment of the amount of defraudation by the victim; the defendant entered Korea after 7 years have passed since the prescription period for the crime of fraud of this case was the prosecution; according to the statement of the complainant, the defendant appears to have been in Japan to have been in Korea to avoid the collection of the claim while blocking and escapeing the crime of several billion won, the defendant continued to stay abroad for the purpose of escaping criminal punishment until April 16, 2009, which is the date of entry after the crime of this case.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, the statute of limitations on the instant crime was suspended, and the statute of limitations on the instant crime was not completed until November 26, 2014, which was the date of the instant indictment.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. However, in light of the following circumstances which the court below cited as the grounds for acquittal, and the fact that there is no other circumstance to acknowledge that the statute of limitations for the crime of this case has been suspended due to evidence, the court below's decision that acquitted the defendant is just and acceptable, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor, as otherwise alleged by the prosecutor.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

① The Defendant was subject to a disposition to suspend indictment in around 1994 on the grounds of suspicion that took a 481,000 won or more at around 192. However, there is no relation with the instant fraud crime and there is a high interval between the date of the crime and the date.

Defendant 1 settled a dispute with the payment of the price in favor of the above case.

The assertion is made from the above point of time.