The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the prosecutor in the gist of the grounds for appeal, the court below rendered a verdict of innocence against the defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

2. Determination

A. In a case where a transferee of an automobile in the summary of the facts charged of this case intends to re-transfer it to a third party, the transfer of ownership must be registered in his name.

Nevertheless, around January 2012, the defendant paid 2 million won in cash to a person who is not injured in his name in the old world near the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and acquired DNA options vehicles in the name of limited liability company C by purchasing them.

Then, while driving the said vehicle without the procedure for the registration of transfer of name, the Defendant received cash of KRW 2 million from E at the street at the entrance of the Masan-dong, such as the “Mausan” located in the Silung-dong at Silung-dong, and sold the D options to E.

As such, the Defendant acquired an automobile and sold it to a third party without undergoing the change of name.

B. The lower court determined as follows: (a) as evidence consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, the statement made by the Defendant’s investigative agency to the effect that “E purchased a high-speed vehicle in KRW 2,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,00,00,00,00.