The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of two and half years, and by imprisonment for a period of three and half years, respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the fact of erroneous determination of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (Defendant B) 1, September 8, 2017, and October 5, 2017, Defendant B is aware of the importation of each penphone as of October 5, 2017 only that the goods which he/she carried in to the Republic of Korea are industrial multiplemond reduction. However, only on April 2018, the fixed body of the goods is mers, amblopty (one-phone, one-time, and one-time, hereinafter referred to as “philopon”).

Defendant B became aware of the fact that the substance of the sealed article was narcotics. As such, Defendant B transported phiphones on September 8, 2017 and October 5, 2017 without knowing that the substance of the sealed article was narcotics. As such, at the time of each act, there was no dolusor intention on the import of phiphones to Defendant B at the time of each act. (ii) Defendant B stated that Defendant B imported phiphones (200g) on October 5, 2017 at the prosecution on the quantity of phiphones imported on October 5, 2017. However, this is merely a statement that was made based on the Defendant’s erroneous statement in a state that was not accurately memoryed at the time.

Furthermore, the quantity and transport method of the transport of the textphones are different from each other, and the price proportional to the quantity of the textphones is not paid. Thus, it cannot be readily concluded that Defendant B imported KRW 200,000 in return for the import of the textphones on the ground that Defendant B received KRW 3 million in return for the import of the textphones.

Therefore, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be deemed to have been proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt that Defendant B imported more than 100g of philophones at that time.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: imprisonment of four years, additional collection of KRW 97,750,000, Defendant B: imprisonment of five years, additional collection of KRW 68,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. As to Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, there was no intention to import philophones at the time of importation of each philophones on September 8, 2017 and October 5, 2017.