The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Around 09:00 on May 26, 2016, the Defendant, without obtaining approval from the Minister of Food and Drug Safety, cultivated the 750 poppy cost, which is an plant used as a raw material for narcotics, at the Defendant’s house located in the Duyang-gun C.

2. On a consistent basis from the investigative agency to this court, the Defendant considered 3-4 poppy expenses as fireworks before 4-5 years from the “4-5 years ago, and was in mind for the purpose of ornamentally growing up to 3-4 poppy expenses on the roadside and on the side of the driving range at one’s home, and naturally increased them.

'Written Statement'.

Defendant’s consistent statements may be easily distinguishable by means of external appearance from the quantity of return used as raw materials for narcotics and the quantity of return for delivery permitted for the official use.

or having knowledge and experience to distinguish between the accused and the accused.

In addition to the fact that there is no evidence as to the fact that the defendant planned or attempted to extract narcotics from the above mass return expenses, and the defendant has no record of being investigated or punished as a crime related to narcotics, it cannot be readily concluded that the defendant cultivated the above mass return with the knowledge that the expenses for mass return discovered at the end of the defendant's house reaches 750 weeks, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the criminal intent of the defendant.

3. If so, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of this judgment is publicly announced pursuant to Article 58(2) of the Criminal