The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and misapprehension of the legal principles) D is habitually a person who administers a phiphone or hemp plant at the time, and thus, D was unable to accurately memory the distance and required time between places, D's purchase of phiphones from E at an investigative agency, so it is low that D's false classification of the Defendant as the seller of the instant phiphones at the time of retaliation from E is likely to be taken. Rather, D's accurate memory is contrary to the empirical rule, rather than that D's accurate memory at the time and time when the Defendant returned, and all of the Defendant and D's statements are recognized on the day of the instant crime, the lower court rejected the credibility of D's statements and acquitted the Defendant on the sales of the instant narcotics. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on mistake of facts and the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, i.e., D, related to 0.1g of the penphone that was confiscated at the time of arrest, and stated that D received the above penphone from E at the time of arrest, but reversed the statement that he received the above penphone from F at the time of the police investigation (Evidence No. 15, 16 of the evidence record), which stated that "the F had no fact of purchasing the penphone again," and that the statement was reversed several times in the court of the court below, which stated that "the F had no fact of purchasing the penphone," and (ii) according to D, the defendant was sent to Korea with the penphone at the time of arrest, and that the cellphone was included in the same part as a vinyl (Evidence record, 96, 97, 132 of the Republic of Korea, and the airport search process of the Republic of Korea).