The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant submitted a letter of complaint that he would pay 2.5 million won exceeding the statutory commission without paying the third Deputy Commissioner brokerage commission to E. Thus, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On March 22, 2012, the summary of the facts charged of the instant case submitted a complaint to the purport that E would be punished because E would have received a commission beyond the statutory brokerage commission even though the Defendant actually did not pay the commission to E, and on the same day, E would not be made by making a false statement to the same effect at the above police station.

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the following facts can be acknowledged: (a) the facilities of this case and F, the purchaser of the site thereof, hold a check of KRW 127 million on February 22, 2012, which is the date of the sales contract; (b) the Defendant, the owner and seller of the said checks, who is the owner and seller of the said facilities, paid KRW 100 million to D as the purchase price; and (c) the remainder of KRW 200,000 (two copies of KRW 1,000,000,000) to the owner and seller of the said site, who is the owner and seller of the said land; and (d) the fact that the said checks were deposited into the account of private individual among real estate arranged for the said sales contract on the same day.

In light of the above facts, it is difficult to believe that the Defendant and D together paid KRW 125 million to the sum of KRW 3.3 million in cash and the sum of KRW 3.3 million in cash and the sum of KRW 3,300,000 in cash received from F when paying KRW 3.3 million to D is paid as a check.

In addition, as seen above.