All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant: The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, although the Defendant did not sell phiphones to E, thereby making a mistake of fact or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence (one year and two months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles must be without any reasonable doubt. However, this is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence recognized as probative value is not allowed beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Do1335, Sept. 13, 1994). If the witness’s statement is consistent with the witness’s statement in the main part, the credibility of the witness’s statement is not readily denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1212, Aug. 20, 209). However, considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court’s determination that the witness’s statement was consistent with the E-A’s first testimony or misunderstanding of legal principles is not acceptable.