The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

No. 12, 13 of the evidence seized by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the crime of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (as to the sale of marijuana), each of the sale of marijuana constitutes one crime, the facts charged in the instant case cannot be deemed to have been specified as the facts charged because the date, time, sale quantity, place of sale, and purchaser of each of the sale of marijuana are not specified.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of 18,186,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (part 1 to 9 of the crime sight table 1)

A. The purport of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act stipulating that “The statement of facts charged shall be made to specify the time, date, place, and method of a crime.” The purpose of Article 254(4) of the same Act is to ensure the efficiency and prompt trial by limiting the object of the trial, while at the same time, to facilitate the exercise of the defendant’s right to defense by specifying the scope of defense, and to facilitate the exercise of the defendant’s right to defense by specifying the scope of defense. As such, the prosecutor, who is a prosecutor, must comprehensively consider the above three specific elements, describe specific facts that constitute the elements of a crime so as to distinguish other facts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do7465, Dec. 9, 2005). The same applies to

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Do391 Decided April 28, 2006, Supreme Court Decision 2010Do2857 Decided April 29, 2010, etc.). (b)

In light of the above legal principles, this case is examined.

The following circumstances recognized by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below are recognized:

① On March 15, 2019, the investigation into the Defendant’s trade in marijuana began on the Defendant’s D website by discovering a letter posted by a police officer on the Defendant’s D website to “pop-up for marijuana.”

The police shall be the defendant.