The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. On April 23, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Narcotics Control Act at the Gwangju District Court on one year and six months, and completed the execution of the sentence at the Jeonju Prison on February 30, 2016. On April 14, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for perjury at the Gwangju District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 23, 2017.

Defendant is not a narcotics handler.

On October 20, 2016, around 17:45, the Defendant parked on the road front of the branch office located in C bank located in Daegu Northern-gu B, Daegu Northern-gu, the Defendant sold 1.9g of vinyl C, which is a part of approximately 5.9g of a local mental medicine, to D, in a car operated by the Defendant, a part of a plastic drug (one name - one - one - another - one - one - one - one - one - another - one - one - one - one - one - one - one - another - one - one - another - one - one - one - one - one - one

2. As evidence consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, there is evidence of evidence that corresponds to the facts charged in the instant case, there is a protocol of interrogation of the police against D (third time) and a protocol of interrogation of the suspect to the prosecution against E (second time), a record of recording, and a voice appraisal report.

First, each of the above statements made by D was first purchased from DF philophones.

The defendant purchased a philoopon from the defendant after the statement was reversed.

In light of the fact that D makes a statement, and thereafter, D made a statement that it did not purchase philopon from the Defendant by reversaling the said statement completely, and that the indictment and the final judgment on D related to the sale of philopon were written as “the purchase of 5.9g philopon from the “persons without a name” in this case,” etc., the above statement of D alone is insufficient to recognize the facts charged.

On the other hand, the notice of the record and the result of voice appraisal is, in particular, introduced the other party to the recording to "G" which is the defendant's separate name, and in light of the fact that H is detained between the two, the relationship between H, I, etc., and dialogues with the two.