The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding 1) With regard to the facts constituting the crime of paragraph (1) of the lower judgment, the Defendant is a merptist (hereinafter “copon”).

A) There is no fact of delivery. D’s statement at an investigative agency to the effect that it is not a phiphone but a balon, and that D’s statement to the effect that it is possible to receive balon from a third party before entering a hospital and a balon, and that there is no reason for the Defendant to free balon to D who did not have any particular relationship with D before entering the hospital, this part of the crime cannot be deemed to have been sufficiently proven to the extent that this part of the crime is beyond a reasonable doubt. (2) As to the crime of paragraph 2 of the crime in the holding of the lower judgment, the Defendant did not have any fact that D’s balon on the coffee, which was written in falon, did not know of the fact that falon was balon and faloned in the coffee, and

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts

1. According to the evidence of the judgment, around 20:38 July 28, 2019, the defendant taken a studio of a white paper bag in the main elevator of the C Hospital located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and delivered it to D, and ② The F stated, “D entered the studio near C Hospital with D, the studio used by E going to the studio, and D produced materials in plastic bags to itself and E, and recommended D to administer the studiophone at the same time,” and “EDo” D did not have any specific relationship with the above studio on the date on which the above hospital was found.