The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts). According to the evidence submitted, the prosecutor, according to the evidence submitted, C, not an attorney-at-law, handles C’s legal affairs related to the case of liability and calculation without the direction and supervision of the private defendant who is not an attorney-at-law, and the defendant allowed C, not an attorney-at-law, to use the name of the defendant’s attorney-at-law in the above legal affairs. However, the court below acquitted the defendant

The argument is asserted.

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case shall not allow a person who intends to handle legal affairs without qualification as an attorney-at-law to use the name of the attorney-at-law.

Nevertheless, on November 4, 2011, the Defendant, an attorney-at-law, had C, other than an attorney-at-law, handle personal rehabilitation, bankruptcy, and face-to-face amounting to KRW 349,500,000 in total by using the name of the Defendant’s attorney-at-law at around 180 times, and received KRW 99,00,000 in return for the loan of name from the said C (550,000 won per case) from the clients of personal rehabilitation cases using the Defendant’s attorney-at-law’s name.

B. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the records, the lower court’s judgment: (a) it is sufficiently probable that the Defendant accepted, on account of the name and account of the law firm of this case, an individual rehabilitation case (hereinafter “individual rehabilitation case”) on the account of the law firm of this case, and dealt with the relevant legal affairs; and (b) it seems that it conforms to the facts charged, part of the prosecution against C.