The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal, although the defendant was found to have removed a license plate of D Treatment 11.5 tons car truck (business use) and affixed it to Hyundai 1.5 tons 1.5 tons car trucks (private use), the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged, which erred in the misapprehension of facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The Defendant: (a) paid KRW 20 million to E, received two business license plates from C; and (b) planned to use the number plates within approximately 20 days; (c) asserted that the Defendant was unaware of how the number plates were affixed to modern trucks.

However, in light of the amount of the Defendant’s payment or the use plan of the number plate, the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant did not know that the number plate is changed is not easily acceptable.

However, in full view of the circumstances revealed by the lower court, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, i.e., there is no direct evidence as to the Defendant’s attachment of the above number plate to modern car trucks, and there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant actually operated the above number plate, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be deemed as proven that the facts charged are beyond reasonable doubt, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is not sufficient to prove the facts charged and it is reasonable to find the defendant not guilty, and it cannot be said that there is an error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the prosecutor.

3. If so, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.