A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

10,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The amount equivalent to the above additional collection.

Punishment of the crime

From July 8, 2017 to July 17, 2017, the Defendant administered Mespopic amba (one philopopon; hereinafter referred to as “philopon”) in an irregular way between the Defendant and the Defendant, in the irregular area below Busan, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made by the police with regard to B;

1. A copy of the report ( July 17, 2017) as a result of a request for investigation, drug reaction test, copy of the confirmation ( July 17, 2017) of close inspection, a reply to a request for appraisal [2017-S-7684, urine ( July 17, 2017)], a response to a request for appraisal [2017-S-8057, gene appraisal], a response to a request for appraisal of data data on DNA identity verification, a response to a request for appraisal (2017-S-8057, gene appraisal), an investigation report (related to drugs for clothes of a suspect), an investigation report (report on the market price of narcotics related to additional collection charges), and a report (report on the market price of narcotics) [where the defendant and his defense counsel did not administer a penphone as stated in the

The reason is that B's GG stability system was taken, and the fact that the GGG contains philophones at the time of taking the GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGE

Therefore, the issue of the instant case is whether the Defendant administered phiphones on the date and time indicated in the facts charged, and whether the Defendant included philophones in the nephical stability of B’s clothes.

First, it is examined whether the defendant administered philophones on the date and time stated in the facts charged.

Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which provides the principle of free evaluation of evidence, provides that the probative value of evidence shall be based on the free evaluation of the judge, is due to the fact that it is appropriate for the discovery of substantial truth, and the judge's arbitrary judgment is not accepted. Thus, the judge of the court of the fact that the judge has a discretionary power to determine evidence should consider the perception obtained in the trial and the examined evidence in the recognition of fact.

In addition, the probative value of evidence is left to the discretion of the judge, but the judgment should be consistent with logical and empirical rules, and it is found guilty in the criminal trial.