1. Of the judgment below, the part not guilty of Defendant C’s taking of property in breach of trust and the part as to Defendant D, respectively.

(b) The person who has fraudulently acquired the above amount by claiming the same money as in a false manner;

Since there is a lack of recognition, the judgment of the court below that acquitted this part of the facts charged is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of law by mistake as pointed out by the prosecutor.

Therefore, the prosecutor's ground for appeal on this part is without merit.

In the premise that the subcontracting company claims Z to be located in the victim Korean road, the prosecutor specified “determined progress payment” in excess of the real value among the existing construction works claimed by the subcontractor in the Z as the amount acquired by the victim Korean road. However, among the existing construction works attached to the judgment of the court below, there are items on which the Z does not claim for construction with the victim Korean road, and for example, there are 5 kinds of existing construction works (a total sum, No. 15) in U.S. lid, 60 x 50 x 60 x 60 x 60 x 60 0 x 60 x 60 x 60 x 60 x 60 x 60 x 60 x 14 x 20 mar 4 mar mar mar mar mar mar mar mar mar mar mar 214.