The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The Defendant is not a narcotics handler.

On June 2012, 2012, the Defendant purchased a penphone from E, a psychotropic drug, with approximately KRW 80,000,000, from E, 1.7g of psychotropic drugs.

2. As to the facts charged of this case, the Defendant consistently asserts that there is no possibility of purchasing phiphones from E from investigative agencies to this court.

As shown in the facts charged in the instant case, E’s statement at the first investigative agency is not sufficient to be made.

[Public Prosecutor's Office recognized that E sold 1.7g of philophones to the defendant as in the facts charged in the instant case in the course of committing a crime such as philophone medication (Seoul District Court Decision 2012Radan5196). The trial record stating such fact has absolute probative value. However, the prosecutor did not prosecute the defendant at the time that E sold philophones to the defendant. The facts charged include only "E purchases philophones from the defendant upon the request of the defendant to purchase philophones and deliver part of the philophones to G," and there is no ground for prosecution's argument on different premise. However, E, upon receiving the previous investigation, made a concrete statement on the situation before and after selling philophones to the defendant at the police and the public prosecutor's office, but it reversed the previous statement as a witness after arrest of the defendant, and it did not know that E would have a philophones to be administered in a normal way.

On the same day, G has delivered a philophone amount, which is considered to be correct as G is recognized, and the rest of 1.7g.