The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the prosecutor’s statement E in the gist of the grounds for appeal, the judgment below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The recognition of facts constituting an offense in a criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to fully reach the extent that the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as where the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14487, Apr. 28, 2011). Examining records after comparing the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s judgment is just and acceptable, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be deemed to have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant is a person who keeps F’s property by consignment relations.

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