The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor as to the gist of the grounds for appeal, at least 8 wheelchairss as indicated in the judgment below, the existence of which is proved, were damaged by the seizure marking, and thus, the defendant may be found guilty of part of the facts charged. However, the court below found the defendant not guilty of all the facts charged regarding the 38 rolls of this case.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case. Thus, the court below is just in finding the defendant not guilty of the whole facts charged, and it is not erroneous in the judgment of the court below that affected the conclusion of the judgment

① The Defendant, in fact, stated in the prosecution that he was husband Q Q (the 61th page of the evidence record) and accordingly, most examinations were conducted against Q instead of the Defendant in the interrogation of the suspect to the prosecution.

② The prosecutor stated that Q puts the name of the Defendant as the representative because Q was the bad credit standing (Evidence No. 61 page) and stated in the court of the first instance that “in fact, Q moved the original unit 8 of this case to the company outside of the factory by ordering the company R of dispatched workers.”

③ The victim appears to have practically run the Defendant’s husband Q in the prosecution.

In substance, Q has been deemed to have committed an act to evade compulsory execution, but since the defendant is a nominal owner in form, the defendant filed a complaint.

If Q’s suspicion is proved, Q would be punished (the page 48 of the evidence record). (4) At the present time upon transfer of F’s factory, S, which was currently being used, proposed that Q would hinder the work of the original group 8 rolls of this case, thereby hindering Q, and Q would be dispatched workers.