The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact-misunderstanding and the legal principles, it cannot be recognized that the prosecutor's standard for calculating the market price of philopon is not less than five million won, and the defendant's imported philopon market price is more than five million won. Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles by applying Article 11 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (a 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment 1 on the misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles as to the assertion in the lower court also made a assertion as to this part. On this, the lower court held that, in light of the following: ① the number of crackdowns on narcotics and the monthly trend of narcotics published by the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, the number of crackdowns by agency, the amount of seizure, and the price of cancer transactions each year since 1989; ② the price of cancer transactions by area on the monthly trend of narcotics is assessed by reflecting the results of criminal investigation into narcotics occurred in the office in question; ② the price of cancer transactions by area in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in charge of the office in

The decision was determined.

As revealed in the circumstances stated by the court below, at least an objective cancer transaction price has been formed with respect to philophones.

As can be seen, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

2) The lower court determined that ① the Defendant imported to sell philophones at the time of the first investigation by the prosecution, but did not sell any philophones.

(2) At the time, there is no money at the time when he receives 70 g of philophones from E, in return for the last time.