The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A divers (Evidence No. 1) that have been seized.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) is too unreasonable.

B. Of the facts charged in the instant case by the public prosecutor, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, even though there was a photograph (Evidence No. 130 pages), inquiry of communication data (Evidence No. 136 pages) as evidence to reinforce the Defendant’s confession, and an interrogation protocol of prosecutor’s office as to M, which is erroneous in matters of mistake of facts.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's appeal

A. On September 2012, the Defendant: (a) received 400,000 won from M in front of the L Building at the time of the Government; (b) received 400,000 won from G in front of the F Post offices at the Government-si, with the request for “coponing copon; and (c) assisted M in the sale of the said copon copon copon copon copon copon copher in front of the F Post offices at the Government-si.

B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the charges on the ground that the Defendant’s confession constitutes an unfavorable evidence against the Defendant and thus cannot be deemed as evidence of guilt, on the ground that the Defendant’s confession constitutes evidence against the Defendant, and the confession cannot be considered as evidence of guilt, on the contrary, on the grounds that the Defendant’s confession constitutes evidence against the Defendant, although the Defendant led the Defendant to arrange the trade of philopon at an investigation agency and court, the response to communication data submission (Evidence No. 16) submitted by the Prosecutor was merely a mobile phone with the phone number as “O” was admitted in the name of M. M

C. Reinforcement evidence of confessions made in the judgment of the political party is sufficient when it can be recognized that the confessions of the defendant are not processed, even if the whole or essential part of the facts constituting the crime is not sufficient to the extent that it can be recognized that the confessions of the defendant are true, not processed, as well as indirect evidence or circumstantial evidence.