The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the victim knew that he would bring up her debt to sunrise from the beginning of October 2015 and told that he would come back again to the place of custody of the defendant around that time, and consistently stated that the defendant would continue to use his debt to sunrise; as a result of conducting a false terminal detection test on whether the victim permitted the use of debt to sunrise, the victim's response to truth, and the defendant's false response has occurred. In light of the above, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case without obtaining permission for use from the victim, but there is an error of law of misunderstanding of facts.

2. In light of the circumstances described in the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acquitted the victim of the facts charged of this case on the ground that it is difficult to view that the victim's statement at the investigative agency of the victim and her husband D and at the court of the court below alone was proven beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant stolen the debt within the scope of sunrise of this case, considering the victim's relationship with the defendant, and the defendant's price for debt between sunrise and sunrise of this case.

In light of the circumstances, etc. of the court below's reasoning recognized by the records of this case, even if the prosecutor took into account the circumstances alleged as the grounds for appeal, the court below's above decision is justified and there is no error of law by mistake of facts alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.