A. The judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, although the Defendant did not administer philophones, is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year of imprisonment, additional collection of one hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below's and the court below's decision, namely, the defendant's evaluation of the defendant's vision and hair detected, Eul, the doctor of the Gyeongbuk University Hospital, stated in the court below that the defendant, after the defendant was in an emergency room, he returned to the emergency room, he returned to the court below, he returned to the effect that he returned to the investigation agency the fact that the defendant, after he was aware of the fact that he was in an emergency room, and again returned to the defendant. The defendant stated that he did not have administered the mephone, and that he was exempted from using the mephone, but the defendant did not use the mephone, but the defendant did not have the meine composition in the prescription of the Gneology, and the defendant did not have any influence on the defendant's assertion that he could not have any influence on the part that the defendant permitted the me to administer the me, as stated in the court's decision.

B. On September 2013, the Defendant rendered a judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing.