The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged of this case was proved without reasonable doubt as to the Defendant’s theft of the items stated in the facts charged at the date and place of the charge, only by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.

The summary of the facts charged of this case, which was acquitted on the ground that there is no evidence to prove otherwise, is as follows.

On June 14, 2016, around 15:57, the Defendant: (a) at the D convenience store located in the petition district C at the Cheongju-si (Cheongju-si); (b) caused the Defendant to steals a disposable-style bag (hereinafter “victim”) containing a 38,00 won high volume of the market value of the victim E, which is owned by the victim E.

2. The defendant asserts that the reason for appeal is that the convenience store of this case has found a color bag containing sea drinking water.

According to the records of this case, around June 14, 2016, at the convenience store, which is the place where the crime of this case was committed, the Defendant took a photograph of the fluored red line, which is the damaged goods, with the color bags.

The defendant's ordered sea drinking water is recognized to have been delivered at his residence, and the red fluor has not been distributed on the packaging paper of the sea drinking water.

In full view of these circumstances, the fact that the Defendant carried out the damaged goods of this case at the place of the crime of this case can be fully recognized.

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict for lack of evidence to acknowledge the facts charged of this case, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment

3. Determination on whether a deliberation was made

A. The recognition of facts constituting an offense in a criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence of probative value, which leads to a judge to have a reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s certification was not sufficiently enough to achieve such conviction, the Defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable.