The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and three months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the crime of smoking marijuana as stated in the judgment of the court below, there is no evidence of reinforcement in addition to the confession of the defendant as to the crime of smoking as stated in the judgment below.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and three months of imprisonment and additional collection KRW 3,00) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The corroborating evidence of a confession as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles can only be sufficient if it is recognized that the confession of the defendant is not processed, even if the whole or essential part of the crime is not recognizable, and it can only be proven that the confession of the defendant is true, not processed. In addition, indirect evidence or circumstantial evidence, not direct evidence, can also be proven. In addition, if the confession and reinforcement evidence are consistent with each other and it is possible to prove the criminal facts as a whole, it is sufficient to prove the evidence of guilt (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7883, Nov. 27, 2008). In light of the above legal principles, the health stand in the instant case, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the defendant smoked marijuana received and delivered without compensation from the defendant, who is an accomplice, as stated in paragraph (1) of the criminal facts of the court below.

As such, since the written statement on the date, time, place, circumstance, etc. of smoking was consistently maintained until the original judgment, it is sufficient to guarantee the authenticity of the confession in accordance with the Defendant’s statement that he/she was given the marijuana smoked by himself/herself, as well as the content of the Kakao Stockholm messages (Evidence Nos. 13 and the message photograph) sent by the Defendant and B, without any reason to suspect the voluntariness of the confession.

Since it appears that the defendant's confession of the smoking crime in marijuana is a reinforced evidence.

Therefore, it is true.