The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. If C, the gist of the grounds for appeal (the factual error), was notified by the Defendant of managerial difficulties in B (hereinafter “B”), the complainant did not conclude the instant contract for the supply of goods.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts, although the defendant did not notify the complainant of the managerial difficulties B.

2. The lower court determined that: (a) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated; (b) the Defendant cannot be deemed to have neglected or committed deception to the complainant during the process of entering into the instant goods supply contract; and (c) the Defendant’s deceptioned G on behalf of the complainant to enter into the instant goods supply contract.

In full view of the following facts: (a) it is difficult to deem that the complainant was accused or conspired with G; (b) it is difficult to deem that Class 7 of the goods under the instant goods supply contract were normally supplied around June 10, 2015; and (c) the sales activities were continued to be conducted to normalize B at the time of entering into the instant goods supply contract; and (d) the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was insufficient to have the intent and ability to supply the goods from the time the Defendant entered into the instant goods supply contract.

The facts charged in this case are insufficient to recognize the facts of deception or deception to the complainant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge them, and thus, the facts charged in this case were acquitted on the ground that there is no evidence of crime.

In addition to the above circumstances admitted by the court below, considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the judgment of the court below is just and cannot be deemed to have erred by mistake of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion.