The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is consistent with the purport that E was issued by the Defendant two times from the Defendant, and that he appeared witnessed, each of the following statements is not somewhat consistent with the accurate date and time and place of the delivery of the phiphones, and the package and container of the phiphones, but is considerably consistent with the weather situation at the time of the instant case, the circumstances in which E was contacted with the Defendant, E’s process of sending phiphones from the Defendant, and other three dialogues and contents among the Defendant, and J also stated to the effect that he delivered phiphones from the Defendant E. According to the record (No. 13) submitted by the prosecution, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (hereinafter “the facts charged”), and found the Defendant guilty of the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (hereinafter “the Act”).

2. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. The facts charged 1) The Defendant was not a person handling narcotics. (A) On December 2, 2010, the Defendant issued and received approximately 0.5g of psychotropic drugs, free of charge, to E, within the K7 cars driven by E parked in the D cafeteria parking lot located in Seo-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul, within the limit of 19:0-20:00, mid- to December 2010.

B) From the lower end of December 2010 to January 1, 2011, the Defendant: (a) sold approximately 30 grams of oponon to E in KRW 7.8 million, within HDap-based car driven by the Defendant, which was stopped on the front road of “G located in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu.” From January 12, 2011; (b) around 19:0-20-20 on January 3, 2011; (c) the Defendant is not a person handling narcotics. Around January 3, 2011, the Defendant is not a person handling narcotics.