The judgment below

The penalty collection portion shall be reversed.

4,464,00 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The remainder of the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The court below erred by misunderstanding the legal principles by recognizing the defendant's crime of importing phiphones, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the legal principles, although there is only the confession of the defendant with respect to the crime of importing phiphones.

2) With respect to the remainder 17.04 g of partially sold or seized philophones imported by the Defendant, the lower court calculated the amount to be collected based on KRW 400,000 per 1g retail of philophones in Seoul at the time most adjacent to the sentencing date of the lower judgment.

However, the lower court erred by calculating the amount of collection without any data on the number of retailers in the Seoul metropolitan area at the above time.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of KRW 10,416,00) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the existence of the evidence of reinforcement 1) The evidence of confessions can only be sufficient if it can be recognized that the confession of the defendant is true, not as processed, even if it is not sufficient to acknowledge all or important parts of the crime. Moreover, indirect evidence or circumstantial evidence, not direct evidence, can be proven. If confessions and reinforcement evidence are mutually consistent and it can be acknowledged as a whole as evidence of guilt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do1897, Jan. 8, 2002). 2) The Defendant led the Defendant from the investigative agency to the lower court on July 5, 2017 to the Defendant’s arrival at the international bar in Tae Man Pon Pon Pon Don Lon Don 30g, Lon Don Lon Don, Lon Don, Lon Don, Lon Don, Lon Don Lon 30g, which was concealed on July 60, 2017.

3) However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant left the airport of Mapo on July 4, 2017 after completing the training.