The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

approximately 17.8g (Evidence No. 1) shall be confiscated.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not submit the grounds for appeal by December 9, 2014, which is the lawful period for submission of the grounds for appeal.

On December 19, 2014 and January 9, 2015, after the expiration of the statement of grounds for appeal, each of the arguments is asserted as follows.

The defendant's act of entering the Republic of Korea with a penphone was merely an act of using a penphone in order to alleviate the pain caused by traffic accident and legacy, but did not have the purpose of selling or distributing the penphone. Thus, the defendant's act of entering the Republic of Korea with a penphone constitutes "bearing" under Article 60 (1) 2 of the Narcotics Control Act, not an "export or import" under Article 58 (1) 6 of the same Act, and the sentence of the first instance (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant, ex officio, did not submit the grounds of appeal within the period for submission of the legitimate grounds of appeal, but ex officio examines sentencing of the first instance court.

The crime of this case is a Chinese person living in China, and a Chinese person who has carried out approximately 17.8g of philophones.

Criminal defendant's crime is a crime that has a serious adverse effect on community as well as the physical and mental health of an individual, and its social risk is high.

The sentence of imprisonment on the accused is inevitable.

However, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime; (b) the Defendant was committed against his mistake; (c) the Defendant’s sealed phiphonephones were seized and not distributed domestically; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (c) various sentencing conditions in the instant pleadings, such as circumstances after the commission of the crime, and the level of sentencing in similar cases, the sentence of the first instance court, which sentenced the Defendant to four years of imprisonment, is deemed to be heavy

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is no longer maintained.

3. If so, the decision of the court of first instance is reached.