The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant requested the victims to make unnecessary advertisements and caused the victims to suffer disadvantages if they did not comply with such request.

It is reasonable to see that the court below acquitted the victims of this part of the charges, although the defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the victims made harm and injury. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to attempted fraud, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges, although the defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that he attempted to acquire five lands and row houses by deceiving the victim and attempted to acquire three bonds at the time of transfer, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. Determination

A. Summary of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) The Defendant was a person who, from July 2010 to July 2016, served as the president of the daily newspaper B (mutual name before the change: C) in the area south of Gwangju, operated the instant case with the title of the president from July 201 to July 2016.

A) When the Defendant was faced with financial difficulties in the course of the operation of B, the Defendant was willing to attract money and valuables under the pretext of advertising fees against the victim operating a construction intermediate waste disposal company in the name of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) in the city of Nasi, by gathering a minor error in the F’s site of waste disposal, and by threatening the victim to report to the relevant agencies or to be engaged in interrogation as if he were to be engaged in interrogation.

On July 2015, the Defendant instructed G, H, and I, a reporter of B, to thoroughly gather and report environmental issues in F’s business site. G, H, and I, as the Defendant’s instructions, found the victim in F’s business site and found the victim in F’s environmental civil petition. Accordingly, the Defendant’s business site was established on the basis of the following: (a) the Defendant discovered the victim in F’s business site; and (b) the Defendant confirmed the environmental civil petition.