A. The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A (one year and two months of imprisonment) was too too unreasonable and thus unfair (unfair sentencing) (b) misunderstanding the legal principles on Defendant B1) illegally arrested Defendant B without notifying Defendant B of the principle of dissipation, etc. with a warrant of arrest against Defendant A only with a warrant of arrest against Defendant B, and without reporting Defendant B’s residence rapidly. Since then, Defendant B led Defendant B to a toilet, led Defendant B to make a confession of the fact of the instant phiphone medication, and let Defendant A conceal the narcotics.

At this time, another police officer, without a search and seizure warrant for Defendant B outside the toilet, found Defendant B’s bags, wallets, clothes, etc. and secured them in the form of voluntary submission.

As such, the arrest and seizure of Defendant B is not based on lawful procedures, and the evidence acquired therefrom cannot be used as evidence of guilt. Thus, there is no evidence to reinforce the confession of Defendant B.

2) The lower court’s sentence against Defendant B, which was unfair in sentencing (one year and two months of imprisonment), is too unreasonable.

2. Determination as to Defendant B’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine

A. Determination on the legitimacy of an urgent arrest and an urgent seizure