The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the mistake of fact-finding cultivation, the Defendant visited City/Do around September 2019, and there was no visit from May 2019, and there was no visit from the City/Do. Thus, around May 2019, there was no fact that the Defendant spawns by spreading the hemp seeds to the spawn joints, etc. following the residence of B located in City/Do around May 2019, and there was only a fact that the hemp was kept wildly.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the lower court on the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant cultivated four marijuana by driving in City/Do of May 2019 the seeds of marijuana.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

① The Defendant made a statement from an investigative agency to the lower court’s court on April 5, 2019, to the effect that he/she entered a City/Do and spreaded the seeds of marijuana to B, and asked B to see whether marijuana is well friendly. Although the statement about the point where the hemp seeds are rootsd is partially changed, the Defendant consistently made a statement about the horses that he/she spreads marijuana seeds to himself/herself and to B.

【Evidence Records” (hereinafter referred to as “Evidence Records”)

(2) Around May 2019, the Defendant visited a female-child Gu and City/Do to the effect that he/she was asked to see whether he/she was well aware of it (Evidence No. 325 pages, etc. of the evidence record). The Defendant stated that, after his/her residence, the marith of 163, 210 to 212, 349 to 351, 201, the Defendant visited himself/herself to the effect that he/she was well aware of it (Evidence No. 325 pages, etc. of the evidence record).

(Evidence Records 326 pages, 338 pages). (3) The Defendant asserted that only visited City/Do around September 2019 and that there was no entry on May 2019. However, B entered the investigative agency into City/Do at the time and Do at the time.