Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment and additional collection of KRW 932,00) is too unreasonable.

B. Although the Defendant, in collusion with F and G for three occasions, acquitted the Defendant on the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (mariana) among the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court determined on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor: (a) to the effect that the statement made by the investigative agency corresponding to the facts charged in G was made by the investigator F in response to the question whether the investigator smokes marijuana at the time of the crime or the place of the crime; (b) this does not appear to have been led to his memory; and (c) it cannot be ruled out the possibility that G made a statement to the effect that it was made in a confession without careful attention to the facts charged in this case, which is the content that at the time G could be an investigative official; (d) although the investigative agency made a statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case, the F made a statement that corresponds to the facts charged at the court of the lower judgment, although the investigator did not accurately associate with the investigation by the investigative agency, it was a statement that the investigator respondeds to the question of the investigator, and (e) G and F made a statement that the Defendant did not smoke at the time of the crime or that the Defendant did not smoke, in view of the fact that the investigative agency’s statement and the statement were inconsistent with the testimony.

The above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor in the judgment of the court below.