A. Defendant 1) The Defendant did not have administered philophones over three occasions, such as the written conviction in the judgment of the court below.

2) The sentence of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In light of the results of the reply of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation, the lower court, based on the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, such as E’s statement, proven the facts charged.

It is difficult to see

The court rendered a judgment of innocence, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the Defendant’s assertion on the Defendant’s factual misunderstanding, based on the same assertion as the above grounds for appeal at the court below’s court below’s judgment, with detailed explanation of the Defendant’s and his defense counsel’s assertion under the title “determination on the Defendant’s and defense counsel’s assertion” in the court below’s judgment. In light of various arguments (E’s statement appears to have been made in the state where the Defendant’s and defense counsel took drugs such as stroke stroke m, etc., and E takes into account the fact that he administered sonphones by taking notes from W, and entered into an inhuman relationship with the Defendant, and there was a motive to falsely report the Defendant in order to escape this situation, the court below’s determination is just and acceptable, and contrary to the Defendant’s assertion, there was an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts, as otherwise alleged by the Defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, each of the above arguments by the defendant is without merit.

B. The lower court’s judgment on the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake on the facts alleged by the Prosecutor is that E, at the same time and place.