Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that found the Defendant guilty of violation of the Narcotics Control Act (fluence) due to the purchase and sale of phiphones.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Whether to adopt the application for examination of evidence is not necessary by the court at the discretion of the court

In determining the seal, the examination may be omitted (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7947, Jan. 27, 2011, etc.). Therefore, the lower court did not accept the Defendant’s application for witness.

Even if it is not illegal, it cannot be said to be illegal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.