The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below erred in misconception of facts against the defendant, which found the defendant not guilty, even though the summary of the grounds for appeal is found guilty.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s determination is consistent with the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the date and time indicated in the facts charged at the investigative agency and the place where B works, and ② the CCTV images of the OOel as stated in the facts charged were confirmed by the investigative agency, and the Defendant’s vehicle entered the telecom parking lot around 00:06 on December 1, 2018, and the Defendant paid accommodation expenses with the victim’s credit card at around 00:08, and then changed one 50,000 won from the cel to 10:0,000,000 won from the cel to 2:0:0,000, more than 1:00,000, more than 1:00, and more than 2:5:00,000, more than 0,000, more than 2:00, more than 1:5:00,000, more than 2:00, more than 3:000.