From July 24, 2013 to August 11, 2013, the part of conviction was administered once between the Meteampia.

A. In fact, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant was not guilty of the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., among the facts charged in the instant case, even though it was acknowledged that the Defendant had administered the Mepta on one occasion between the police officer in the middle of December 2012 and the around July 24, 2013 and around August 11, 2013.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fines 8,00,000) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The lower court determined that among the facts charged in the instant case, each of the entries in the appraisal request report, appraisal report, investigation report (Attachment to cell phone calls used by a suspect) and each of the statements made by the lower court and the investigative agencies in the lower court as evidence for the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (hereinafter “the instant charges”). According to the statement in the appraisal request report, the Defendant’s response taken on August 28, 2013 at the hand-to-face of 0.8 cm or 1.1 cm in length and length, the Defendant’s response to “the voice” at the hand-to-face of 4 cm or 8.5 cm in length, 70 cm in length to 70 cm in her mother-to-8 cm in her mother-to-8.5 cm in her mother-day condition, and the method of collecting narcotics, etc. at least 47 cm or 150 cm in her mother-to-day condition, which can be found to be combined in its part.