The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal in relation to the special robbery against the Defendants among the facts charged in this case, according to each of the statements, etc. by the victim and Defendant B, it is acknowledged that the Defendants conspired to commit an implied or Roman robbery and that Defendant A and C shared the act of implementation in cooperation with Defendant B during a time and place. However, the lower court rejected the statements by the victim, etc., and found the Defendants not guilty of this part of the facts charged, so the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on evidence with probative value that leads the judge to feel true beyond a reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). If there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it is inevitable to determine the defendant's interest (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9890, Feb. 12, 2009). The conspiracy or conspiracy of a criminal suspect under Article 334(2) of the Criminal Act does not necessarily require a prior accusation, but it includes a matter of intention, but such conspiracy or conspiracy should not be based on strict evidence to acknowledge it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9890, Feb. 12, 2009).

Comprehensively taking into account the following additional circumstances acknowledged by the court below, comprehensively taking into account the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, evidence rules, and legal doctrine (Article 10-16 of the court below's decision).