The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, in order to obtain dividends from the proceeds of the auction of the property owned by the victim J and K, the Defendants conspired to create a false promissory note claim in the future and deceiving the auction court by submitting an application for the distribution of dividends to the auction court. Accordingly, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts of the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants of all the charges of this case, even though it is possible for the victims to receive dividends from the auction court, and the victims to receive dividends from the auction court, and it is sufficiently recognized that they did not receive dividends from the provisional seizure, etc., and did not receive the actual dividends from the provisional seizure.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below is that the crime of fraud in the lawsuit is aimed at deceiving the court to acquire the property or property benefits of a third party by deceiving the court, so in case where the owner of the money to be distributed in the compulsory execution procedure such as the distribution procedure and the debtor acquire the property benefits by deceiving the court in collusion with the third party in the manner of bringing the third party into the false creditor, the victim thereby shall be deemed to be the person who was unable to receive the distribution due to the above deception even though he could receive the distribution if he had not been accused of the court in the procedure (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7631, Dec. 11, 2008). According to the records, the land of this case is owned by E and the above building was owned by the defendant. The defendant Eul demanded distribution as a general creditor of the defendant Eul and the distribution schedule was prepared pursuant to the distribution schedule. Since the defendant Eul cannot receive the distribution from the proceeds of the sale of the above land, the defendant Eul shall not receive the distribution from the heir of the victim E, the heir of the victim.