A. Under the facts charged, paragraph 1 of the charge (import of 10 gphones on December 1, 2009) stated that "D requested an investigative agency to send E-phones to send them when sending a written phone (in page 254 of the investigation record)," ② the quantity of the penphones is more than 10 g, more than that of the Defendant's imported to sell or use, the delivery accident occurred frequently due to the characteristics of the penphones, and the Defendant's cell phone number is written, so it is highly probable that the Defendant's cellphones were imported from 10 gphones to E-phones at least 10 gphones, and it is highly probable that D's act of sending it to 10 gphones to the Defendant's own account, and it is highly probable that D's act of sending it to 10 gphones to E-phones without consideration.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that there is no proof of Paragraph 1 of the facts charged beyond reasonable doubt.