The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The police officer in charge of the instant allegation of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (i.e., the instant allegation of the case No. 2019No. 1776) was frightened with the Defendant’s forces that could not be known and taken from the Defendant’s horses, and arrested the Defendant by forcing the Defendant to enter the guest room occupied by the Defendant.

Since the above investigation by the police is unlawful, the evidence collected thereby is inadmissible pursuant to Article 308-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and this part of the public prosecution procedure is invalid in violation of the provisions of law, and thus, it should be dismissed in accordance with Article 327 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

In addition, the defendant, like Article 2(a) of the facts charged, has broken the victim's glass at the victim's room or laid down the victim's glass. However, this was self-defense to defend himself/herself against the victim's attack by electric shock or electric shock.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

B is the person who sells written phone to S and T in relation to the case No. 2019 order8268.

The defendant was generally aware of the sales activity B and did not take part in it.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of selling phiphones to S and T is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

Article 22(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that a prosecutor shall inform the defendant of the drug upper line in relation to the case in 2019Kadan6960, and the prosecutor shall not prosecute the person who was informed of the fact, and only the defendant shall be subject to disadvantage.

In addition, the case of 2019 Highest 2062 and 2019 Highest 6960 was included in the case of 2019 Highest 1776, and was prosecuted separately.

This prosecution is against the principle of equality under the Constitution.