The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, even if the Defendant received the construction cost from the victims of fraud, the lower court acquitted the victims of the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, even though there was no intention or ability to complete the test work properly.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of four million won) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below 1 on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is as follows: (a) the construction period of the construction contract of this case was set at approximately one month by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below; (b) G, the contractor, also stated that the construction work was normally undertaken at the court of the court of the court below; (c) the construction work of this case was done at the level of 50% by G, F, the contractor of the construction contract of this case, and the defendant's assertion that the construction period of the construction work of this case is less than the rate calculated through accurate appraisal, rather than the rate calculated by accurate appraisal; (c) the defendant executed lighting work corresponding to the last process of the construction of this case; (d) the construction work of this case was partially constructed by the main household; and (d) the construction work of this case was completed at the request of K, the contractor of this case after suspending the construction work of this case; and (e) the construction work was completed to the extent of 00 days to the extent that it was not consistent with the construction work cost.