The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the facts charged is that the mother of D, who is the mother of D, has no normal separation and judgment ability due to dementia and has no mental capacity with respect to legal relations, and that he donated the inherited real estate of this case owned by D to E, who is his father, by a certified judicial scrivener G, who is aware of the above facts, and made an application for transfer of ownership by entrusting the registration of transfer of ownership.

On May 26, 2011, a registry official entered the above inherited real estate into computerized inputs to complete the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of gift in the name of the defendant's father E in the future. Accordingly, the defendant made a false report to the public official, and made the public official enter false facts in the land register, which is the same electronic record as the original of a notarial deed, and exercised it by having him keep the land register on which the false facts are recorded.

2. According to the GDS test, which is a one-time return to the dementia examination prosecutor, the summary of the grounds for appeal, D appears to have been in the state of recognition of a 6-stage severe disability among the 7-stage stages at the time, and as the Defendant filed a complaint with D’s husband, the deceased H (the Defendant’s husband), and committed assault against D, etc., the case in which H was detained, and where H was arrested, it is not good that D had no mental capacity due to dementia at the time. As such, if D was not in the state of recognition of a serious disorder in evidence, there is no reason to donate the inherited real estate, and the statement of G by a certified judicial scrivener seems to have been in the state of having no mental capacity due to dementia at the time.

In full view of the above circumstances, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case, despite the fact that the defendant was fully guilty, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and thereby affecting the conclusion

3. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the Defendant, theO, and the P were dead by marriage with the network N, and the network N was found to be a child, based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court.