The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that G is difficult to readily conclude that G’s statement is credibility solely on the grounds that G did not directly instruct employees other than G, etc., the credibility of G’s statement is high in light of the following: (a) a considerable period of time has elapsed from the time of crime; (b) G does not have any reason to make a false statement; and (c) the fact that the Defendant did not direct employees other than G.

Nevertheless, the court below rejected the credibility of G's statement and acquitted the defendant, and the court below erred by misapprehending the facts.

2. In light of the fact that the criminal appellate court has the nature as an ex post facto trial and the fact that the appellate court directly observed the appearance and attitude of the witness in the process of witness examination as to the witness supporting the facts charged, even though the appellate court judged that the credibility of the witness's statement cannot be acknowledged, if the appellate court reverses it and decides that the credibility of the witness's statement can be acknowledged, it should be said that the first instance court's judgment rejecting the credibility of the statement can be acceptable, and that there is a sufficient and satisfactory circumstance to understand it.

In light of the above legal principles, examining the reasoning of the judgment below in comparison with the evidence duly admitted and examined, G’s statement is not deemed to be beyond reasonable doubt, and as long as F’s statement that was previously made from G, etc. is the specialized statement making the original statement of a third party and is not reliable, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the person who was not guilty of the facts charged of this case is just.