Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the Defendant did not intend to jointly process the crime of selling and buying narcotics and arranging the sale and purchase of narcotics, and the Defendant did not recognize functional control. Therefore, the Defendant is not a joint principal of the above crime, but a joint principal of the crime.

The sentencing of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment, additional collection 30,906,180 won) is too unreasonable.

In full view of the fact-finding, misunderstanding of legal principles, and text messages sent and received by the Defendant and his accomplice B, the existence of Nopt North Korea, which was discovered in the Defendant’s residence and served as the server of the instant site, and the motive to establish the instant site and the system of the website operation, etc., the Defendant’s habitual

The sentence of unfair sentencing by the court below is unfair because it is too uneasible.

Judgment

As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles that the defendant did not constitute a joint principal offender, the lower court also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part. In full view of each of the facts or circumstances admitted by the employment evidence, the lower court determined that the defendant took part in the above crime by jointly processing the advertisement of narcotics and the mediation of the sale and purchase of narcotics with B, and that the defendant took part in the above crime with intent to realize

Comprehensively taking account of the circumstances cited by the lower court, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted and investigated by the lower court and the lower court, the lower court’s determination is reasonable, and there is no error of misapprehending the legal principles as to joint principal offenders.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

The “D site produced by the Defendant” refers to “S” which is the multilateral web site that trades or offers good offices for the sale and purchase of marijuana.

However, the defendant is about marijuana through the Ssite at the time of the first interrogation of the prosecution, which was initially investigated by the investigative agency.