The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), and sentenced the Defendant to three years of imprisonment, among the facts charged in the instant case, on the grounds that the res judicata effect of the judgment on the case, such as the Defendant’s fraud, which became final and conclusive on June 28, 2012, sentenced the Defendant to each acquittal on the following grounds: (a) the lower court dismissed the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation, on the grounds that the res judicata effect of the judgment on the remaining parts (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the crime of forging private document”).

However, as the defendant did not appeal against the judgment below, and only the prosecutor appealed against the acquittal part, the guilty part and the rejection part of the compensation order became final and conclusive as they are.

Ultimately, this Court's judgment is limited to acquittal part of the judgment below.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. It is true that the Defendant’s summary of the assertion was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor at the Suwon District Court on April 5, 2012 due to the fraud of the victim L, such as the reasoning of the lower judgment, and the above judgment on June 28, 2012 (hereinafter “instant final judgment”) became final and conclusive.

In addition, the time and place of the crime against L among the criminal facts of the final judgment of this case and the crime such as fabrication of private documents of this case are the same.

However, given that the content of the crime, such as the means and method of the crime, the form of the act, and the benefit and protection of the damaged legal interests are different, the res judicata effect of the instant final and conclusive judgment cannot be deemed to extend to the crime, such as the fabrication of the instant private document.

On the contrary, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the charges of the crime, such as forging private documents, etc., is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the identity of the facts charged or the facts charged, which affected

B. (1) Judgment is a criminal trial.