A. Defendant B1) misunderstanding of facts (the sales of philophones on June 6, 2018), the Defendant did not sell philophones to A around 20:00 on June 6, 2018. The Defendant made a statement as the sole evidence as to this part of the case, and there is no credibility of the statement as to the time of receipt of philophones, purchase price, etc., that is, the core part of the case, changed the contents of the statement, and contradictory before and after the change. 2) unfair sentencing Article 1, 2 of the lower court’s punishment (the lower court’s punishment of KRW 1 year, confiscation, KRW 70,00, and KRW 2 of the lower judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor of KRW 4 months, KRW 100,00,00).

B. Defendant H’s sentence (a year and six months of imprisonment), which was sentenced by the lower court (a year and six months of probation, probation, confiscation, 332,500 additional collection charges of KRW 332,50,00,000, stated the amount of additional collection charges against Defendant H as KRW 432,50,000, appears to be erroneous and unreasonable.) is too unreasonable.

C. Prosecutor 1) Proof of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles (the acquittal portion of Defendant H in the judgment of the court of first instance, ① With respect to the receipt of marijuana from Defendant H on May 2018, 2018, the Defendant’s statement to the effect that “the Defendant was aware that he had sought Zonopon from the flat Z,” and that the Defendant stored Zopon’s contact address in his Handphone under the name of “AA” can be corroborated evidence. ② With respect to the purchase and sale of honopon on June 2018, Y is a person who is not a honer, but a person who actually exists, and the fact that he is a narcotics criminal. ③ With respect to the smoking of marijuana on May 2018, 2018, the Defendant’s response to the training of the maopon from the con on June 25, 2018’s ingredients may vary from 0g, 200g, 10g, and 20g, etc.