The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles) in collusion with the Defendant submitted to the immigration control office a false refugee application, lease agreement, etc., in order to obtain a change in the location of the body of the immigration control office and obtaining permission to change the status of stay. Whether the public official in charge caused mistake, mistake, or site due to the fraudulent act by the Defendant, thereby causing the change in the location of the body and the change in the status of stay to the refugee applicants, or not due to insufficient examination by the administrative agency.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, on the contrary.

2. The lower court’s determination is insufficient to recognize that the evidence alone presented by the prosecutor was insufficient to recognize that the execution of official duties was hindered with regard to the change of physical distribution by the Defendant’s deceptive scheme, etc.

In light of the facts charged, the lower court acquitted the instant charges.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the reasoning of the court below, the above judgment of the court below is justified, and the prosecutor's assertion that there was an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, however, Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the 12th page 1 of the judgment below ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure shall be corrected to “Article 58(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.”