All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. The court below found the defendant not guilty on the grounds that there is no proof of crime regarding the facts charged of this case. However, in light of the fact that the account and account in the name of the defendant A was used in the crime of this case, that the defendant B purchased the mileage as cultural product right and exchanged it, and that the defendants conspired to commit the crime of this case, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the grounds that the defendants conspired to commit the crime of this case.

2. In a judgment, the burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence of probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt is between the defendant, even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(2) The court below's decision on July 22, 2010 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151, Jul. 2, 2010) is based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below. ① Defendant A opened a passbook of the National Bank in his name on September 14, 2007 and transferred approximately KRW 20 million in total from Defendant B 27 times from March 21, 2008 to April 30, 201. However, it is difficult to view it as the consideration for the instant crime. Moreover, it is difficult to view it as being committed before the instant crime, and the general Bosing Criminal Organization did not use the so-called one-called one-called one-called one-way one in order to escape the investigation agency's real name. The fact that the defendants used the national bank in his name to commit the crime by Defendant A is against the rule of experience, ② Defendant B establishes the company's spouse in his name on Apr.