The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the fact that C holds the certificate of registration of the forest of this case and the statement of the statement and the confirmation document prepared by C, I, and K, the court below acquitted the Defendant on the ground that there is no proof to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the title trust agreement, although it can be sufficiently recognized that there was a title trust agreement between the network D and the Defendant on the forest of this case.

2. Determination

A. The court below held that the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① the statement of C was merely the fact of title trust from the network D and thus it cannot be assessed its probative value, and ② it is difficult to believe it as it is due to the lack of consistency in the statement at the time when the facts of title trust were first recognized, ② the statement of the I is difficult to believe it as it is due to the lack of consistency, ③ the confirmation of J is insufficient as evidence for the fact of title trust, ④ the statement of K is insufficient as evidence for the fact of title trust, ④ “the defendant requested the real estate brokerage office operated by K to sell the forest of this case to the real estate brokerage office operated by K, and withdrawn it after being requested to sell the forest of this case.” ⑤ The defendant obtained the registration certificate of the forest of this case from D and obtained it from D to purchase the forest of this case and prepared the defendant's certificate of possibility to purchase the forest of this case and processed it in the future.”