The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) Since the facts charged in the instant case were not specified, the prosecution should be dismissed.

2) The Defendant, along with female-friendly job offers F, received from F “G” a club “G” located in the Philippines. The Defendant was presumed to have discovered philophone ingredients from the Defendant’s base because of the fact that some black men, who play together with F, received from F “Energy”. However, there was only the fact that philophone ingredients were detected from the Defendant’s base, and there was no fact that philophone was administered at the date and place indicated in the instant facts charged.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment and one hundred thousand won of additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The purport of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act stipulating the time, place, and method of a crime is to limit the subject matter of a trial to the court and facilitate the exercise of the right of defense by specifying the scope of defense against the defendant. Thus, even in cases where a general indication on the date, place, etc. is inevitable in light of the nature of the crime prosecuted, the prosecutor must specify the date, place, etc., as far as possible by the evidence at the time of the prosecution, and in cases where the failure to do so causes substantial harm to the defendant's defense, it cannot be said that the specific facts of the crime stipulated in Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act are written indictment. However, in the case where the defendant denies the medication, it is submitted as evidence by an appraisal report that the me was found to have detected the mecrys composition from the defendant's urine, and where the defendant denies the medication, it is based on the results of appraisal after subdividing the medication or by other evidence of the defendant.