The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The gist of the prosecutor’s appeal is as follows: (a) considering the consistent statement of the victim; (b) if the victim knew of the fact that a registration of collateral security or provisional seizure was made on the land of this case, there is no reason to purchase the market price; and (c) the fact that the defendant did not have sufficient means to purchase the market price; (d)

In light of the records, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case, on the grounds that there was an error of misunderstanding of the legal principles on the date of the first trial of the court of first instance (the prosecutor's assertion on the grounds of misunderstanding of the legal principles on the date of the trial of the court of first instance, but it is not a legitimate ground for appeal due to the failure to file an appeal). In light of the records, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case with detailed reasoning for its determination. In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the

As such, the judgment of the court below that held to the same purport erred by mistake of facts.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is clear that “the defendant in a civil lawsuit against the victim” is a clerical error in the victim (the name of the wife M) in the civil lawsuit brought against the defendant, and thus, ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, since it is apparent that “the victim (the victim’s name) is a clerical error in the victim’s lawsuit brought against the defendant.”