The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. On August 5, 2016, the Defendant: (a) on August 5, 2016, 17:30, the Defendant: (b) cut off 60,000 won of the market price at which the victim D was installed in the front incineration house of the 121st unit of Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si; and (c) cut off with 2

2. The lower court determined that “at the time, 2 the kick beams were installed between the kick and the incineration place, but the Defendant putting 2 the said kick, putting them in the incineration place, and carried them again.

The statement of the victim D of the lower court to the effect that such CCTV was confirmed is not only inconsistent with the statement made by the investigative agency, but also difficult to believe that there is no CCTV image of such CCTV. The following circumstances acknowledged in accordance with the record, namely, ① the location where two kackboards were installed inside the apartment incineration house, and there were general garbage bags, food waste bags, and clothing removal boxes. ② Although the two kackboards cannot be found out of old age and 75 years old, even if the Defendant disposed of normal things, it seems that the Defendant could have abandoned two kackboards from the Defendant’s perspective, and ③ the Defendant was found to have installed two kackboards between the garbage tank and then brought about the back, which appears to have been submitted by the prosecutor in light of the fact that the Defendant could have been aware that the kacks operated properly, and that the Defendant could have discharged the kacks at the time of the other’s act.