All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The summary of the defendant's grounds for appeal (the factual error, misunderstanding of legal principles) falls under the case where the indictment procedure is null and void in violation of the provisions of law because the entry therein is not specified in the facts charged, and even if not, the defendant did not administer Melopon as recorded in the facts charged in this case, and the defendant's detection of Melopon ingredients in the result of appraisal of the defendant's urine was found in the urine of a combination of the defendant's urine, and thus, found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that the defendant had administered phiphones around February 18, 2012, considering the prosecutor's summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding, the unreasonable sentencing) and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, was erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and thereby adversely affecting

The punishment of the court below (two months of imprisonment, one hundred thousand won of collection) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The facts charged are stated in the facts charged so that facts can be specified by specifying the time, date, place, and method of a crime (Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act). The purport of the law requiring the specification of the facts charged is to facilitate the exercise of the defendant’s right to defense. As such, the facts charged are sufficient to state the facts constituting the crime in question to the extent that they can be identified from other facts by comprehensively taking account of these elements, and even if the date, place, method, etc. of a crime are not specifically stated in the indictment, it does not go against the purport of the law allowing the specification of the facts charged, and it does not go against the nature of the