마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the prosecutor’s appeal is that the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case on the grounds that there is no proof of the crime. However, although D’s statement has credibility and it is sufficient to recognize the facts charged, the court below rejected D’s statement without reasonable grounds, and the court below erred by misapprehending the facts against the rules of evidence and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. The lower court determined that “D has made a protocol of prosecutorial statement as evidence consistent with the above facts charged. However, D has given approximately 0.4g of a philopon purchased from the Defendant on July 2009 to H in the passenger car, and reversed H’s statement that he did not have a philopon to H in the mass newspaper with H. He stated that he did not receive a philopon around the above time, and that H stated that he did not have a philopon received from D, and that it was difficult for the Defendant to view that he or she did not have a philopon on the ground that he or she did not have a philopon (the witness H’s testimony and the suspect’s examination of evidence against H), and that it was difficult for the Defendant to attend the court and make statements on September 20, 2009, and that the Defendant did not have any other evidence that he or she purchased from D on September 20, 209.”
3. We examine the judgment of the court of this case and examine the evidence of this case in light of the records.