On August 4, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Narcotics Control Act at the Seoul Central District Court on August 4, 201, and completed the execution of the sentence on November 29, 201. On April 2, 2015, the Daejeon District Court sentenced two months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Narcotics Control Act at the Daejeon District Court on April 10, 201, and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 10, 2015.

On February 26, 2014, the Defendant appeared as a witness for the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. against the Highest 4785C at the Suwon-si District Court No. 208, the Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Japan-si, 120, and the testimony was made.

On December 20, 2012, the Defendant “I do not have any question to the attorney-at-law “I have a fact that I had a defendant in the vicinity of D’s hotel.”

As to the attorney's question, "I give testimony as to whether I had continuously sold philophones to E at the time," and the attorney's question, "I do not know that I did not have any fact about the defendant in the vicinity of D hotel around December 20, 2012, and that there is no fact about selling philophones," "I do not have any fact about the defendant's contact, and there is a fact about E.

The testimony, "A witness's cell phone is G, and F has been the phone number of the defendant, which was the phone number of 122-124th to 124th day of the investigation record, and there was a statement of conversations from F, a mobile phone of the defendant, to the witness's cell phone on January 17, 2013, and how it became the witness's cell phone."

Therefore, why the witness calls by the phone of the defendant, and there is a defendant's desire to speak.

In this way, the witness currencyed.

And it was called by E at the wind of the defendant;

I have taken place.

“At the time of his testimony,” and “at the time of his testimony, there was no other special discussion.”

In respect of the question of the attorney-at-law “ did not exist”.

b) the Commission;