The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the Defendant had intention to use the subsidy for any purpose other than its original purpose.

Although it is sufficient to view the facts charged in this case, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt should be based on evidence with probative value that can lead a judge to feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant, the interest of the defendant should be determined (see Supreme Court Decisions 95Do3081, Mar. 8, 1996; 94Do3309, Apr. 12, 1996; 94Do309, Apr. 12, 1996, etc.). Furthermore, even if the facts acknowledged in a civil case related to a criminal trial constitute significant recognized materials for the facts charged, the criminal court is not bound by the final and conclusive facts of the civil judgment, and thus, can be recognized differently from the facts established in the civil judgment based on evidence (see Supreme Court Decisions 95Do192, Aug. 23, 1996; 200Do7487, Feb. 10, 2006).

The court below rendered a not guilty verdict on the charge of this case on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge it and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles as argued by the prosecutor.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

(1)