The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below acquitted the defendant of this case on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor was insufficient to prove the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

However, considering the circumstances presented by the lower court based on the judgment of innocence, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court cannot be deemed as having been proven without reasonable doubt, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

① In the video (Evidence No. 107-108 of the Evidence Records) of the black box installed on the victim’s vehicle, there was a face for the Defendant to attempt to make a group of telephone calls over two times at around 23:05 on the day of the instant case, and there was no record of the Defendant’s telephone details (Evidence No. 48, 128 of the Evidence Records) at around 23:05 on the day of the instant case, and there is no question whether the time indicated in the above black box video is accurate.

② The video of the closed-circuit television (CCTV) recorded the instant site was found to have been more detailed and accurate. However, it is somewhat doubtful that the police did not secure all of the images immediately after the instant case, and only some of the images were taken by pictures (Evidence No. 111-112 of the Evidence Record).

③ On May 21, 2013, J made a statement to the effect that the Defendant was waiting at the Defendant’s home at the time of the instant case while communicating with the Prosecutor’s Office.

However, the above currency was made at the time of the lapse of two months from the instant case, and the J went to the Defendant's office several times before and after the instant case.