The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although it is obvious that the defendant displayed functional health foods from January 13, 2014 to February 6, 2014, and thereby sold functional health foods, the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the fact.

2. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial on the board is the prosecutor, and the conviction shall be based on the evidence with probative value sufficient for the judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, and if there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction, the suspicion of guilt is against the defendant even if there is no evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 99Do4305, Feb. 25, 2000). A thorough examination of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor in the original instance in light of the records, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant displayed functional health foods from January 13, 2014 to February 6, 2014 and operated functional health foods sales business. Thus, the lower court’s judgment that acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is justifiable, and it does not err by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3. The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.