The accused shall disclose the summary of the judgment of innocence.

On July 25, 2016, the Defendant: (a) received KRW 50,00,00 from D, and sold a disposable injection device containing approximately 0.06g of Meptop (one philopon), a local mental medicine; (b) on July 25, 2016, KRW 00, KRW 303, and KRW 50,00.

However, the Defendant did not sell philophones to D from the investigative agency to this court, and argued that D's refusal to find D as C's studio and to seek philophones, and that D's refusal to do so was only a requestr and sublime and returned.

On the other hand, the burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in the criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence with probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is any doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it shall be judged in the interest of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 200Do1568, Jul. 28, 2000; 200Do4946, Feb. 9, 2001). According to the evidence, D voluntarily surrendered to the investigation agency that he purchased phiphones from the defendant on July 25, 201, and voluntarily purchased phiphones from the defendant on July 25, 201, and was subject to criminal punishment for the above crime, D had telephone conversations with the defendant and sought the defendant's house, and the defendant also refused D's proposal.

However, it is recognized that the fact that the defendant received a proposal to request philophones itself, and that the defendant was holding philophones at the time of arrest on August 8, 2016.

However, the Defendant, “D, if you perform and miscellaneous narcotics, will create not only the persons related to the narcotics but also those unrelated to the narcotics.”

D is so-called so-called so-called "Shophones" and there is no person who reduces phiphones to D in Daegu City.