The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is as follows: (a) from the end of December 2012, the victim raised an objection to the violation of the web site operation contract of this case and notified the defendant Eul that the contract would be terminated without corrective measures; (b) in the process, the contractual relationship between the victim and the above defendant company has actually broken down and the victim has terminated the above contract on August 15, 2013; (c) the defendant company did not have the right to use the victim's copyrighted works under the above contract; (d) the defendant company and the victim sent the statement that the victim would not use the victim's copyrighted works in several times even though the victim would be punished for legal disputes, such as lawsuits related to the termination of the contract; and (e) the defendant Gap, the representative director of the defendant company of the defendant company, could have been found to have been intentional at the time of infringing the victim's copyright as stated in the facts charged of this case, the court below acquitted the defendants on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the intent of the above defendant.

In light of the above, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case in its detailed statement of the grounds for judgment. The evidence alone presented by the prosecutor cannot be deemed as proved to the extent that the facts charged in this case is beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, the court below's judgment that acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case does not err in the misapprehension of facts as alleged

Therefore, since the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.