The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts (as to the sale of philophones), the Defendant does not sell philophones to C, but jointly purchased philophones with C.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that the defendant sold a penphone to C is erroneous by misunderstanding the fact, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (one year and six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The summary of this part of the facts charged (the point of each part of the indictment (the sale of each penphone) A) from August 9, 2019 to August 10, 2019, the Defendant purchased and sold 600,000 won from C, which was known to ordinary people at the Defendant’s home located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, for the purchase price, from the Defendant’s house located in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, for the purpose of the purchase price of the Megatoty (the “diphone”; hereinafter “diphone”), by transferring 60,000 won to the account and having been in an irregular way 0.7g of the phiphonephone.

B) On November 2019, the Defendant: (a) transferred KRW 700,00 from the Defendant’s house located in C and E, to the Defendant’s house, for the purchase price of philopon, and sold and purchased the philopon 0.7g, which had been held by an irregular method at that time; (b) the Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in the lower judgment; (c) the lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, argued that the Defendant’s act is reasonable, based on the following circumstances known by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court; (d) (i) the Defendant received the payment from C and delivered the philopon directly to C; and (ii) the Defendant consistently stated from the investigative agency to the lower court that the Defendant purchased the philopon.

3. The above decision of the court below was made.