The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal stated that D consistently stated that there is no rumor that “if you enter an auction, they shall not make a speech to C and C, if C and C shall not make a payment of the remainder of the money.” As such, C may not make a statement.” In light of the fact that the Defendant stated in the recording book of conversation between the Defendant and D that “A would be able to mislead HC (the name before D’s name) when you enter an auction,” and that “A would be able to mislead HC (the name before the name of D’s name) at the time of the internal auction.” In light of the fact that D’s credibility in the statement, and that the facts charged of this case is proven, the judgment of the court below acquitted the Defendant, or erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

2. The lower court determined that it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant’s statement as such was false against memory on the grounds of detailed reasoning in the part concerning “3. Judgment” among the reasoning of the judgment, and that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize it, and that the Defendant was acquitted.

In comparison with the above judgment of the court below, a thorough examination is conducted by comparing the evidence, and it seems that D brought the copy of the register of the above apartment, and discussed the method of collecting claims through the defendant's compulsory execution, etc., the defendant also made such remarks to D by using the above notarial deed. In this process, it is probable that the defendant alone filed an application for auction of the above apartment, the defendant's testimony does not affect the result of the fraudulent case, and the contents of the defendant's testimony do not affect the conclusion of the fraudulent case, and the prosecutor argues that the contents of the recording are obvious that the testimony of the defendant is false. However, according to the contents of the recording, the above recording alone it is difficult to conclude that the testimony of the defendant is false.