The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles), witness G’s statement, Defendant’s partial statement, and the list of property specification cases 2058, etc., the fact that the Defendant intentionally omitted two systems air conditioners jointly owned by the partners of D coffee stores in the above property specification case can be acknowledged.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby acquitted the instant facts charged.

2. In a thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the evidence of this case alone based on the determination of evidence as stated in the court below had an intentional intent to submit a false list of property to the defendant.

In light of the above, the court below's decision that the defendant was not guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there was no new evidence that corresponds to the facts charged of this case in the court below, so there was an error of law by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles as pointed out by the prosecutor in the judgment below

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, prosecutor's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.