The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years and four months.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

(b).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) In fact, the Defendant did not purchase a penphone from G, or administer a penphone with G (number 1 per annum), or sell a penphone to U (number 2 per annum), or deliver a penphone (number 3 per annum) to M (number 5 per annum).

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of each of the facts charged. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentencing of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (2 years and six months of imprisonment, additional collection 3.2 million won) is too unreasonable.

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

2. Determination on Defendant A’s grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, G provided the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court: (i) the part on the purchase of phiphones from G and the part on the joint medication with F (No. 1,200 won per annum of crime sights); (ii) G sought phiphones from the public prosecutor’s office and the lower court’s court’s “F around March 201,” and 200,000 won.

In addition to the defendant and F, the car in Busan W was driven by the defendant and F, and the defendant and F were 5g of the penphone from H on the alleyway adjacent to the Busan W building.

When returning to Seoul, the defendant was driven by the defendant, stopped on the side near X, and the defendant and F injected the phiphone to a single-use injection machine.

Persons who have a large number of narcotics are able to drive because they are stable only one to two minutes after medication.

In full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant made a statement as “(2014 High Order 3482 [Attachment 23] Nos. 282-288 of the Evidence List, and trial records No. 282-288 of the trial records)”; and (b) G’s statement is not having any specific and consistent grounds to make a false and unfavorable statement against the Defendant, and thus, its credibility is high, it can be recognized that the Defendant purchased phiphone from G and administered it with F as stated in the facts charged in this part.