The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor who submitted the summary of the grounds of appeal, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, even though the defendant, in collusion with B, would give a discount to the Promissory Notes and the current check, and could sufficiently be recognized that the defendant received a promissory note, etc. from the injured party for discount

2. In a judgment, the burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt ought to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to cause a judge to feel true that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction, even if there is no doubt about the defendant's guilt, it is inevitable to determine it with the benefit of the defendant.

From the investigation agency to the trial court, the Defendant requested discount of the Promissory Notes and the Promissory Notes, etc., with a total face value of KRW 278,000,000,000,000,000 for face value, from K on behalf of the victim F on December 1, 2009, but at that time, the Defendant merely introduced B and received the Promissory Notes, etc., as it did not have any capacity to discount the instant Promissory Notes, etc. at that time, and the Defendant argued to the effect that B was not involved in the instant crime.

In regard to this, the lower court: (a) there are major documentary evidence shown in the facts charged in the instant case against the Defendant; (b) the statements made by the lower court and the investigative agency in B and the victim F in the lower court, a copy of discount agreement (the eight pages of investigation records); and (c) a copy of the performance letter (the 51 page of investigation records). However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., K representing the victim F, and the Promissory Notes, etc.