The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor with the gist of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant conspireds with D and C to arrange F to engage in sexual traffic by means of ‘the remaining conditions'.

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict on the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. We examine the evidence of this case closely in light of the records. The court below is justified in finding the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case on the grounds that it is difficult to find that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, for the reasons stated in its reasoning, by introducing a male purchase to F, as stated in the facts charged of this case, was involved in the act of sexual traffic brokerage or the defendant was guilty of sexual traffic brokerage to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts as pointed out by the prosecutor, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the “F” of the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment is clearly a clerical error in the “after the instant case,” and thus, it is obvious that the “F” of the 3 pages 9 of the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment is an error