The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the statement of the defendant in the investigative agency and the circumstances in which the defendant received fees from C, etc., the defendant can be recognized as acquiring property by deceiving the victims as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, but the judgment of the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in the instant case by misapprehending the legal principles as to public offering and fraud.

2. The recognition of facts constituting an offense in a criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not reach the degree to have the aforementioned conviction, even if there were suspicions of guilt, such as contradictions with the Defendant’s assertion or defense, or non-competence, it should be determined in the interests of the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do231, Jun. 28, 2012). The instant case back to and back to the investigation agency and the court of original instance, the Defendant was paid as the introduction of money from KRW 1 to 30,000,000,000,000,000,000 won per cell phone opened by introducing victims to and giving them to investigation agencies and the court of original instance, it is doubtful that C’s act

I stated to the effect that the defendant did not take any particular measure in the desire of introduction because he had been aware of it, and there is a doubt as to whether the defendant would not obtain the property from the victims in collusion with C.

However, the following circumstances revealed from the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendant believed that the Defendant would open a cell phone around March 2015 to the victims and deliver to C one cell phone in trust with the intent of opening a cell phone around April 2015, which was before the Defendant introduced the victims to C, and then transferred to C the same. This is not a behavior taken by a person who has conspired to commit a crime, and ② the Defendant is not a person who has committed a crime.