The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding: In full view of the statements of the witness E and E, even if the defendant was found guilty, the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment of the court below by misunderstanding the facts, and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (200 million won) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the finding of guilt shall be based on evidence with probative value, which makes it possible for the judge to have a conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt, and if there is no such proof, the conviction cannot be judged even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001; 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006). In addition, in light of the fact that the appellate court is in the face of a trial but has the character as a follow-up trial, and the fact that the first instance court has the character as a follow-up trial under the Criminal Procedure Act in view of the spirit of substantial direct deliberation as prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Act, etc., there is insufficient evidence to exclude a reasonable doubt after undergoing the examination of evidence by the witness.

In a case where a not-guilty verdict is rendered on the facts charged, if it does not reach the extent that it can sufficiently resolve the reasonable doubt raised by the first instance trial even if the probability or doubt about some opposing facts may be raised as a result of the appellate trial’s examination, there is an error of mistake in the determination of facts in the first instance judgment, which lacks proof of crime solely

The judgment of the court below is just, and it is not found guilty of charges (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do11428, Feb. 18, 2016). In light of the above legal principles, examining the reasoning of the judgment below closely compared with the records, the judgment of the court below is justified, and the prosecutor is also justified.