The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the following, the summary of the grounds for appeal: (a) the temporary materials used at the construction site of this case can be recognized that the Defendant stolen the temporary materials of this case, but the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant was not guilty, even though the user was clearly divided into the parts of the construction company; (b) the Defendant took temporary materials and did not properly control the removal of the temporary materials at the construction site of this case; (c) the Defendant could easily remove the temporary materials externally, and there is a possibility that the Defendant could transport materials in collusion with the Defendant alone or with other heads of Bans.

2. Comprehensively considering the evidence submitted by the judgment prosecutor, the defendant transported the temporary materials of the victim company to F's camping site on October 30, 201, and took part in opening the temporary materials of the victim company removed at the construction site on February 17, 2011. The defendant had been aware that the victim company's temporary materials at each of the above temporary sites had engaged in green scambling indicating F in the instant construction site at each of the above temporary sites, but the records are acknowledged as follows. In other words, the victim company performed the pipeline work at the construction site at the instant site, and F performed the pipeline work at the pipe where the victim company completed the pipeline construction, and on October 30, 2010, the victim company leased both the temporary facilities installed at the victim company at the same time and leased both the leased facilities to BO and the same work site at the same time, and all of the above areas overlap between BO and FO, and the victim company was the same.