The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Facts charged;

A. The primary Defendant is not a person handling narcotics.

(1) On December 12, 2010, the Defendant issued and received approximately 0.5 grams of psychotropic drugs to E, a psychotropic drug, within the K7-car driven by E parked in the D cafeteria parking lot located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daegu, for free, around 19:0-20:00.

(2) From the lower order of December 2010 to January 1, 2011, the Defendant sold approximately 30 grams to E with approximately 7,80,00 gramopon in HDap car driven by the Defendant parked on the front road of the 'G located in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, about 19:00-20:00.

B. Around January 3, 2011, the Defendant issued and received approximately 0.5 grams of psychotropic drugs, to E, within the K7-car operated by E, parked in the Dcafeteria parking lot located in Daegu-gu, Seo-gu, Daegu, for free, around 19:0-20:00.

(2) On January 1, 201, the Defendant sold approximately 30 grams of 19:0-20:00,000 to E in the HDap car driven by the Defendant, who was parked on the front road of the 'G located in Nam-gu, Daegu, Daegu, for approximately 19:0-200,000 won.

2. As to the Defendant’s appeal, the Defendant consistently denied all the primary facts charged and ancillary facts charged (hereinafter “each of the facts charged in this case”) by consistently denying the Defendant’s testimony from the prosecution to the prosecution of this case, on January 3, 2011, on the grounds that there is no fact that the Defendant delivered a penphone to E even though there is no fact that the Defendant delivered a penphone to E, and the witness’s testimony that seem to correspond to each of the facts charged in this case is groundless.

3. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the recognition of a criminal fact ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to such a degree that there is no room for a reasonable doubt. Therefore, the prosecutor’s proof does not reach the extent that such convictions are to be ensured.