The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: (a) there exists a clear statement that the Defendant explained as if he could perform the franchise store interior work in the near future; (b) the Defendant issued a contract for construction works and a design proposal to the victim; and (c) the Defendant stated as if the Plaintiff’s investment proposal book was entered in the Incheon Telecommunication point in Incheon; and (d) the Defendant did not have any special property; and (c) the Defendant was unable to carry on business without any additional investment or loan even if he made a partial statement; and (d) in light of the fact that the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant by deceiving the victim even though he did not have the intent or ability to place an order for construction works as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, it could be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant.

2. Examining the judgment of the court below in a thorough manner with the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, it is just and acceptable to have determined the judgment, and it does not seem that there was an error of mistake of facts as pointed out by the prosecutor.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is reasonable.