The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is erroneous ( ② Although the court of first instance did not decide whether the crime of breach of trust is established even if the obstruction of exercise of right is not established, the court failed to decide whether the crime of breach of trust is established, ② as to the violation of the Factory and Mining Foundation Mortgage Act: since the machinery, etc. of this case is stated in the list of objects which are the object of mortgage attached to the registry of the factory building of this case, the defendant will dispose of movable properties constituting the factory foundation of this case). 2. In light of the records of the judgment of this court, the court of first instance is just in the measures that the court of first instance acquitted the defendant of each of the facts charged of this case for reasons as stated in its holding (in particular, with respect to the violation of the Factory and Mining Foundation Mortgage Mortgage Mortgage Act, referring to the Supreme Court Decision 72Do1090 delivered on May 31, 1972), and since there is no illegality such as misconception of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles

3. Accordingly, we cannot accept the prosecutor’s appeal under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.