A. The Defendant, as stated in the facts of the crime of paragraph (1) of the crime in the judgment of the court below, misjudgments the fact that the Defendant purchased the clopon (the "hopon", hereinafter referred to as the "hopon"), did not have administered the hopon as indicated in the facts of the crime, and did not have any supporting evidence in addition to the confession of the Defendant, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the hopon medication.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment, additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court’s judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the charge of the administration of phiphones is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

Therefore, Defendant’s assertion of mistake cannot be accepted.

(4) The court below held that the Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’s Defendant’

with respect to the administration of philophones.