The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, the part of possession of the Metepoptopy of the 2017 Highest 2751 (hereinafter “philopon”) was derived from an illegal undercopic investigation that, by means of speech, attack, etc., an investigative agency caused a criminal intent against a defendant who does not have the original criminal intent. A public prosecution based on such undercopic investigation constitutes a case where the procedure is invalid in violation of the provisions of law.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The part of the misunderstanding of the legal doctrine is a naval investigation.

The term "incrimination" refers to an investigation method by which the investigative agency, for a person who does not have the original criminal intent, caused the criminal intent to arrest the criminal by means of deception or attack, etc. Therefore, if it is merely an opportunity to commit a crime against the person who has the criminal intent or a facilitation of committing a crime, it shall not be deemed a naval investigation (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Do3490, Oct. 24, 200, etc.). The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the defendant, around June 20, appears to have been in contact with the police with the "Aphone" (the word of the cellphone) that the police used to slopon, which was written by him/her to slopon, appears to have been administered by him/her at the police station and the defendant, and then, the defendant, as the police police and the defendant agreed to purchase the remaining phone on June 21, 2017.