The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is not a narcotics handler.

On February 16, 2016, the Defendant, at the hotel c, “D” room located in the city of Ma-si, the new wall, put approximately 0.07g of Maspile (hereinafter “diphone”), a local mental medicine, into three for a disposable injection equipment, together with E and F, and administered water in a way of injection into each of the following arms.

2. direct evidence that seems to correspond to the facts charged in the instant case, E’s investigative agency and this court’s statement is abundant.

E made a statement in the investigative agency and in this court that the F was successively administered to E, the Defendant, and F arms with three injections in which the F was written.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, it is difficult to believe the statements in E’s investigative agency and this court as they are, and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone are insufficient to recognize that the Defendant administered a daily clopon in the facts charged in this case.

(1) E not only had been in a state of administration of philophones several times before the date this case occurred, but also had F and the Defendant in this Court.

D At the hotel room, he was in a state of mixed mind by administering philophones in his first order.

In a series of times, the E had first been absent from a state of decilation, and thereafter the Defendant had observed that “F and the Defendant have been administered as a matter of course because they had been administered a scopon because they had not been administered by a scopon,” at the site of the time, the Defendant appeared to have observed the administration of a scopon in a mixed mental state or with a scopon of a scopon.

The possibility of statements can not be ruled out completely.

(2) E shall be F in the prosecutorial investigation conducted on July 18, 2016.