The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal and H’s each statement are not consistent and cannot be admitted as credibility against their common sense, while D’s statements are consistent from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and even if credibility can be sufficiently recognized, the court below rejected D’s statements and acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case against the Defendant, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles.

2. Determination:

A. On April 11, 2013, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case was present at the Busan District Court located in the Busan District Court, which was located in the Busan District Court, as a witness of the instant case ( Plaintiff D, Defendant E, and F; hereinafter referred to as “related civil case”) where C is being tried by the presiding judge, and took an oath and took a witness testimony.

The Defendant responded to the Plaintiff’s agent’s question “I would not open the instant commercial building along with H on April 18, 2012, 2012, the witness and G real estate,” “I would like to confirm “I would like to do so, I would like to confirm “I would like to be a low building,” and the Plaintiff’s agent’s answer to the question “I would like to go to the G real estate office together with the Plaintiff, and I would like to go to go to the Plaintiff, and I would go to go to the said place. I would have confirmed only the building,” and the Plaintiff’s agent’s answer to the question “I would like to report I in G real estate,” “I would have not sold this building.”

On the other hand, the Defendant continuously responded to the Plaintiff’s question that “I would have known H at the time of leaving the Plaintiff’s office,” “I would like to go from the Plaintiff’s office, but I would have omitted at the middle of the building?” and the Plaintiff’s “the witness and the Plaintiff considered the instant building in the width.”