All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the prosecutor’s (i) misunderstanding of facts, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged even if the Defendant was found to have received approximately 0.5g of philopon free of charge around September 2018.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing (one year and ten months of imprisonment) is excessively unhutiled and unjust.

B. The lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The gist of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below is that the Defendant received a sylphone from U on September 1, 2018, using approximately 0.5 g of sylphones from T in the vicinity of the Michuhol-gu Incheon, Michuhol-gu, Incheon, for free.

In addition, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the Defendant was led to confession from the investigative agency to this court, but there was no evidence of reinforcement other than the confession of the Defendant.

B. On September 27, 2018, U.S. appeared as a witness in this court and met the Defendant on a daily basis for about six months before being arrested on or around September 27, 2018. Although the Defendant purchased 100 gopon with the Defendant and then divided 50 gopon to the Defendant, there is no fact that the Defendant delivered 0.5 gopon to the Defendant on September 2018, as indicated in this part of the facts charged.

‘At this time the testimony was made to the effect that the testimony was made.

In light of these circumstances, the decision of the court below that there is no evidence to prove the confession of the defendant is justified and there is no violation of law as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. The defendant was punished for the same kind of crime, and committed the crime of this case during the same repeated crime period, the amount of phiphones sold by the defendant, the family environment of the defendant, the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, and other factors.