The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant of the facts charged is not a person handling narcotics.

On October 207, 2013, the Defendant sold phiphonephones by receiving approximately KRW 0.2 gram of psychotropic drugs, which were psychotropic drugs in the RPC room located in Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, Incheon, to E for one-time injection (hereinafter “philophones”) from approximately 100,000 won.

B. On August 1, 2013, the Defendant sold philophones by receiving approximately KRW 0.4g of 0.4g of philophones contained in E one-time injection equipment from the above RPC room at KRW 220,000.

2. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel

A. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant borrowed money from E several times due to economic difficulties, but they did not sell phiphones to E on each day indicated in the facts charged.

B. (1) In a criminal trial, the recognition of a criminal fact should be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof is not sufficiently enough to have such conviction, there is suspicion of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable.

Even if the defendant's interest should be determined (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do8137, Jan. 5, 2009). As evidence consistent with the facts charged in this case, witness E has a statement in this court and investigative agency.

(2) The following circumstances acknowledged by this court in addition to the overall purport of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, namely, E, at the time of being investigated by an investigative agency, stated that the Defendant purchased part of the philophones brought into the state of scopic in the copic inside the bar as indicated in the facts charged, by transferring them to scopics (in the investigation record, 72 pages, 174 pages), and philophones trading.