1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of two years and six months;

3.Entry in the list of seized articles in the annexed sheet.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal principles 1) Violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. due to attempted manufacture of “efabide,” which is the source material of a Mept ambae, a local mental medicine, is impossible to manufacture ambaculing, which is the source material of the Meba (hereinafter “Mebacopon”) by the Defendant who has no experience in manufacturing narcotics and has no professional knowledge, pursuant to the manufacturing method that the Defendant became aware of through the Internet.

Therefore, this part of the crime constitutes an impossible or impossible attempt under Article 27 of the Criminal Act.

2) As to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. by Possession of Basic Substances for Psychotropic Drugs, the Defendant did not continuously possess sulfur and salt acid for the purpose of manufacturing a philodin, and only keep sulfur and salt acid in the troke line because it is difficult for the Defendant to recklessly leave it.

B. The punishment of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of legal principles

A. As to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. due to the attempted manufacture of “Honk,” which is a basic substance of philopon, which is a psychotropic medicine, an impossible crime refers to a case where the possibility of occurrence of a result or infringement of legal interests can not be absolute (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3687, Jul. 26, 2007) due to the nature of the criminal act (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3687, Jul. 26, 2007). In full view of the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, it is absolutely impossible for the defendant to manufacture “HE”

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

① In accordance with the DMT Extraction Act, the Defendant sought to extract chophones, the source materials of chophones, which come to his knowledge through the Internet, and the Defendant searched.