The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and legal principles), although the defendant could sufficiently recognize the facts of embezzlement as charged, the court below acquitted the defendant of each of the charges of this case on the ground that the defendant did not have any criminal intent or intent to acquire illegal profits, or that the defendant constitutes ex post facto act. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Evidence that there is a criminal fact in the judgment criminal procedure shall be presented by the public prosecutor, and the same shall apply to the case where the change of the defendant is unreasonable and it is false;

Even if so, it cannot be disadvantageous to the defendant due to that reason, and the proof of criminal facts must have a judge with high probability beyond reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do163, Nov. 30, 2007, etc.). Examining the reasons for the part of innocence against the defendant among the judgment below in light of the relevant evidence and records, the court below is just in holding the defendant not guilty of each of the charges of this case on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the criminal intent of embezzlement, or that the defendant's act constitutes ex post facto act, and there is no sufficient evidence to deem that the defendant's act constitutes a crime of embezzlement, and otherwise, the prosecutor's allegation above is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.