The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the Defendant could be found to have taken advantage of the alcohol without having the alcohol value at the time of the instant case and had not been in a state where the credit amount at the time of the instant case was not possible due to damage caused by the victim D and credit payment, thereby deceiving the victim as if he had the intent or ability to pay the alcohol value, and acquired it by deception.

Therefore, although the court below should be found guilty of the facts charged of this case, there is an error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the fact that the court below acquitted the defendant.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below after a thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., ① the defendant had been visited at approximately one week prior to the instant case to drinking alcohol at the E main store operated by D, and most of the drinking prices have been paid or traded on credit (in the investigation records, the 8th, 11th, 25th, 41th, and 41th of the trial records). ② The Mamna of the defendant and D's credit payments incurred during the period of October 2012, 2012, which were charged by the prosecutor, are also paid and resolved by finding cash to the defendant's office and paying the remainder in full (the 11th of the investigation records), ③ D was aware of the location of the defendant's office in the process of collecting credit payments under the above paragraph (2) and the police's statement to the extent that the defendant visited the defendant's office (the 20th, 40th of the investigation records).