The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendants did not have the right of advance reservation at the apartment sales agency of the D Regional Housing Association, and even if so, the Defendants did not do so.

Even in the case of loss, the Defendants were not individually granted the right of advance reservation, but merely granted the right of advance reservation to recruit the union members. Thus, even if the Defendants did not have the right to receive the advance advance payment and did not have the right to notify the victims of the fact that new subscription to new sale was possible, the Defendants received the advance payment to the victims, and therefore, the Defendants were sufficiently recognized the intention of deception and the intent of deception.

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the facts charged of this case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. However, since the facts are limited to the defendant's right of advance reservation, the defendant could not receive the premium, and the defendant could not receive the premium, and the court permitted the change of the indictment to the effect that the defendant did not need to pay the premium." However, although the court permitted the change to the above facts, the court did not specifically specify the authority granted to the defendants within the scope recognized as identical to the facts charged and does not affect the defendant's exercise of his right of defense, and the judgment of the court is not reversed on this ground, since the above facts are not affected by the defendant's right of advance reservation but by the defendant's right of recruitment of union members.

(b) mistake of facts by prosecutors; or