A. On January 2015, the Defendant received, without compensation, seeds of return containing narcotic ingredients that C had been kept in custody, from C at the Defendant’s residence located in the Sinju-si.

B. From the beginning of March 2017 to the beginning of June 22, 2017, the Defendant cultivated 652 poppy expenses, which are the raw materials for narcotics, at the end of the said dwelling hall and the road, from the end of the said dwelling hall to June 22, 2017.

2. The Defendant, upon receipt of the judgment, asserts to the effect that the Defendant was unaware of the fact that the seeds were both spawn and the spawn were spawn. ① The Defendant testified to the effect that the relevant seeds were the seeds of the spawn and spawn that the spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn swn spawn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn

In full view of the circumstances such as the failure to find evidence to determine the person, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was proved to the extent that it is beyond reasonable doubt that the Defendant cultivated the quantity of return as above under the circumstance where the Defendant was aware that he was the raw material for narcotics.

It is difficult to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

3. Conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of facts constituting the crime, the court rendered a judgment of innocence against the defendant pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act (the defendant was absent on the sentencing date).