The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the G’s investigation agency and the lower court’s statement, etc. that held that the Defendant shall pay D KRW 25 million instead of actually using the vehicle purchased in the name of H, which is a motor vehicle with the summary of the grounds for appeal, as stated in the facts charged of this case, by deceiving D, as stated in the facts charged of this case, is recognized.

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not guilty verdict on the ground that there is a lack of evidence to prove the facts charged of this case, and the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion

2. The judgment of the court below is based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below: ① the defendant introduced G from the investigation agency to the court below and the trial court; ② the defendant consistently responded to the question of the investigator’s "I will know about how the suspect had no plan to belong to the person who has made the statement; ② the investigator’s question of "I will know about how I would know about how I would know about how I would come to know about the fact that I would come to the witness of this case after the complaint; ② the investigator’s question of "I will come to know about the fact that I would come to know about the fact that I would come to the witness of this case," and "I will come to know about the fact that I would come to know about the fact that I would come to know about the fact that I would come to the witness of this case after the complaint."