The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by misunderstanding the fact that the Defendant had administered a phiphone because of the pharmacological component of which the Defendant used a phiphone, and even if the Defendant had administered a phiphone, it was known that it was another phiphone, and thus, the Defendant had no intention to commit the crime of phiphone medication, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court duly adopted and examined the allegation of mistake of facts, namely, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court: (i) the result of simple reagents test by the river taken on August 29, 2014, which was three days after the date of the crime of the instant case; (ii) the Defendant’s campicers and campicers’ training reaction in the mouth; (iii) as a result of precise appraisal of the said campics; and (iv) the Defendant appeared to be the same as the campicers and campicers in the first interrogation process of the prosecution; (iv) the Defendant was given an explanation that the cambalon was received from the E, and the cambalon was aware of the fact that he had already received a cambalon before being asked to E; and (v) the Defendant was given a statement in the first interrogation process of the suspect’s cambalon and statement that he had not received the cambalon.