The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case, although the defendant could fully recognize the fact that he acquired property benefits and incurred property damage to the victim by violating the duty to register the transfer of ownership to the victim. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Evidence that there is a criminal fact in the judgment criminal procedure shall be presented by the public prosecutor, and the same shall apply to the case where the change of the defendant is unreasonable and it is false;

Even if there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction, it is inevitable to determine the interest of the defendant even if there is suspicion of guilt against the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do163, Nov. 30, 2007). Examining the reasoning of the acquittal portion of the judgment below in light of related evidence and records, the court below, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, proven that the defendant's intent of breach of trust and breach of trust was beyond a reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see

In light of the above, the decision of not guilty of the charged facts of this case is just, and there is no sufficient evidence to deem that the charged facts of this case merely goes beyond the suspicion of conviction and reached the degree of recognition of high probability. Thus, the prosecutor's above assertion

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, and Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure No. 4 of the judgment below’s 14 of the judgment below.