All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and three months.

The seizure of articles 1 to 1.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

(a) The sentence (a fine of three million won) imposed on the Defendant by the first instance trial of the Prosecutor is too unfluent and unjust;

B. Defendant 1) In relation to the facts constituting the crime of the second judgment of the lower court (Article 3 of the facts constituting the crime of the second judgment of the lower judgment), the Defendant did not sell phiphones to L at the time and place as indicated in the judgment of the lower court, and the lower court convicted the Defendant without credibility of L’s statement, which led to an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the judgment of the lower court. 2) The sentence of the Defendant sentenced to the second judgment of the lower court of unfair sentencing

2. As the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below, each of the appeals cases was tried concurrently at the court of the first instance. As long as each of the criminal facts alleged by the judgment of the court below is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, it shall be judged at the same time and sentenced to a single punishment. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to a party member's trial even though the above ground for reversal of facts exists, and this is to be determined below.

3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts (Article 3 of the Criminal Act in the second instance)

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case on the ground that L made a statement that L paid KRW 570,000 to the Defendant in return for the sale of phiphones, and that L’s cash withdrawal details, telephone call details, etc. may be believed to believe this part of L’s statement, and if L did not properly comply with L’s phiphones received after paid KRW 570,000 to L, delivery to L at the time may be recognized as a phiphones.

B. The Criminal Procedure Act adopts the relevant legal principles of the first instance judgment.