The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the summary of the grounds for appeal stated the false facts identical to the facts charged, and it can be recognized that the facts alleged are false, the court below did not recognize that the defendant alleged false facts and that the defendant was aware of the falsity of the alleged facts. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts.

2. The facts alleged by the Defendant are that “The 80 math of the organic dog was killed in the E-Bure Protection Center operated by G during each month and managed by H.”

(1) The Defendant submitted a considerable amount of data with the purport that the Defendant’s expression of “school life” used by the Defendant appears to have expressed the death in a very serious language rather than intentionally slaughter. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, 1) the whereabouts of 136 miles out of May 1, 2016 to June 30, 2018, which was entrusted to the above protective office, were not clearly verified. G submitted to the investigative agency, “A dead, was sent, or sent to the 1,000 Simnes, where the computerized data were omitted,” and most of the relevant data were related to the adoption of the organic dog and the personal information of the adoptees were stated, and 2) At the time of voluntary work, the Defendant and the Defendant stated to the effect that “S, who is a public official of the Net City Team, did not have access to the Macheon-si, but did not have access to the Gumcheon-si.”