The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the credibility of E’s statement, from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, E consistently stated from the end of January 2012 to the court of the court below, that “E sold 0.5g philophones to the Defendant from the beginning of February 2012 to the beginning of February of the same year,” and whether E’s quantity of philophones received from G and contact with the Defendant after the instant case is irrelevant to the instant facts charged, and is partly inconsistent with the Defendant’s statement on o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s o’s gram.

B. Next, as to the credibility of the F’s statement to the investigation agency, the F reversed the statement to the investigation agency in order to recover the money lent to the Defendant, the F has credibility of the statement to the investigation agency, and rather, there is no credibility in the statement in the court below.

C. In addition, although the investigation report and recording are strengthened to the credibility of each of the above statements, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the determination of evidence, thereby misunderstanding the fact-finding.

2. Determination

A. No person, other than a person handling narcotics, etc. of the facts charged in the instant case, may sell, deliver, administer, or possess a psychotropic drug campphone (one camphone; hereinafter “camphone”).

Nevertheless, the defendant who is not a person handling narcotics is around 12:0 on January 28, 2012.