The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, informed the place where a postal item can be received upon I’s request, and did not know that the content of the postal item is a penphone.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in the lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake and misapprehension of the legal doctrine.

In full view of the circumstances indicated in its reasoning based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court determined that the Defendant was sufficiently aware that he/she imported a philopon in a postal item that he/she intended to receive.

Accordingly, the defendant's argument was rejected.

In full view of the following circumstances admitted by the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the circumstances revealed by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

① The statements made at the police and the prosecution of I are as recognized by the lower court, “The upper lines in China will send phiphonephones to door-lines through J, a smartphone case.”

On the other hand, it was consistent with the main part that the defendant had an address to receive it, and that the defendant knew the address of Korean person (C) who became aware of in the course of running the business, and the circumstances of smuggling import of philophones are specific and credibility is recognized.

Although the time and place at which the defendant requested the receipt of postal items, it is not consistent with I's statements on the detailed parts, such as whether it is Ptevis around the end of October, 2016 or Masan-dong, Doksan-dong, Ptevis around November 2016.

However, such circumstance alone cannot deny the credibility of a consistent I’s statement on the principal part as above.

(2) The defendant shall submit his/her case to the trial court.