beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Considering the fact that door-to-door visits sell goods to the main point of the grounds for appeal, the issue of “time to work” is not the main requirement of the visiting salesperson’s duty, and the fact that the Defendant sold goods with the visiting salesperson’s license for grass-to-face healthy life even according to the witness’s statement that the Defendant left profits by selling them, it is recognized that the Defendant made a false statement even if he/she was aware that he/she worked as a visiting
2. The lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, found that, based on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the Defendant was working as a visiting salesperson even if he/she brokered goods sold in grass-free health life and received sales allowances.
It does not appear that the defendant made a false statement contrary to his memory.
It is difficult to recognize
In light of the facts charged, the lower court acquitted the instant charges.
In addition to the circumstances revealed by the court below, taking into account the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① even based on the legal statement of F, E or F, the head of the branch office G for Heunwon's Healthy Life G, the Defendant merely registered as a health teacher to purchase the unclaimed goods at a discounted price, and did not prepare a written contract as a visiting salesman; ② the Defendant appears not to have been subject to management and supervision for business or commuting; ② there was no objective data on the volume of goods sold as a door-to-door salesman by the Defendant as a door-to-door salesman and the allowances acquired therefrom, etc., the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the Defendant’s false statement contrary to his memory.
It is insufficient to view it, and there is no other evidence to prove it.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted is just and acceptable, and it is by the prosecutor.