The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for seven months.

Seized No. 1.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact that the Defendant had already received a non-prosecution disposition from the prosecutor without suspicion regarding the crime of possession of phiphones (T) in the judgment of the court below, and that the object possessed as above was not a philophone but a salt, etc., the Defendant did not possess a philophones as stated in the judgment of the court below, and the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of this fact is erroneous.

B. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which, although the Defendant was not a repeated offender, aggravated punishment by punishing him as a repeated offender.

(c)

The punishment of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances are revealed based on the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., the defendant was already subject to a non-prosecution disposition by the prosecutor in relation to the crime of possession of the aforementioned phiphones.

However, on October 2017, the part of the court below which received non-prosecution disposition on the ground that there is no evidence of reinforcement of confession is related to the act of giving and receiving philophones, one of the one philophones 0.05 ghnopon from the Denoponman. ② The Defendant led the Defendant to the crime of holding the said philophones at the investigative agency and the court of the court below, and the Defendant seems to sufficiently prove the seizure protocol, the list of seizure and the list of narcotics appraisal report, etc., or to reinforce the Defendant’s confession. ③ The Defendant was found to have dried salt other than philophones.

However, in light of the detection of philophones as a result of drug appraisal, the defendant was in possession of philophones as stated in the judgment below.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Each of the crimes of this case (in particular, Articles 2-A, 2-2 and 2-2 of the facts constituting the crime of this case as indicated in the holding of the court below)

C. (i) The date of the commission of the crime under paragraphs (iii) through (iii) is March 2018.