The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

10,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error, misunderstanding of legal principles, and incomplete hearing);

A. On October 18, 2016, the Seoul Probation Office B received a direct defense from the Defendant on the part of the Defendant. On the part of the Defendant, the Defendant inspected a simple trial, and sealed the urine in front of the Defendant, sealed the urine in front of the Defendant, and asked the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office to conduct close appraisal with the Defendant’s unmanned. The Supreme Prosecutors’ Office sent the result of the Defendant’s urphone training to the Defendant’s urine.

The defendant also confirmed the fact that he directly recovered the defenses, and B also stated the facts of the request for appraisal in detail after directly collecting the defenses from the defendant in the court of original instance.

Therefore, the court below rejected the defendant's credibility because there is no reasonable ground to suspect the result of appraisal of the defendant's defense, and there is a possibility of artificial manipulation, damage, or addition.

B. In the judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below acquitted the defendant on the ground that the possibility of non-voluntary medication by another person is doubtful, despite the result of appraisal of the defendant's defenses, is doubtful.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The lower court’s determination that the Defendant’s defense had relevant probative value as a result of the appraisal of the Defendant’s defense, is insufficient solely on the ground that the appraiser submitted the method of scientific evidence to the court after analyzing it as a standard inspection method with professional knowledge, technology, and experience, in order for the method of scientific evidence to be binding to a considerable extent in the process of fact-finding, it should be secured that the identity of the samples was recognized during all processes, such as the collection, storage, analysis, etc. of samples and that there was no artificial manipulation, damage, or addition, and that the accurate acceptance