All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to Defendant 1’s use of a philopon, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, inasmuch as the Defendant did not use a philopon by having D and F put the philop into drinking water and drinking water.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, protection observation, pharmacologic treatment, 40 hours of demotion, confiscation, additional collection 50,00 won) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s determination as to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts reveals the following circumstances, namely, ① D and F have shown symptoms showing symptoms of her body fright or her body, frighted from the Defendant, a customer who has lawfully adopted and examined the evidence, on May 25, 2015. As a result, the Defendant underwent a drug test at hospital on May 26, 2015. As a result, the Defendant’s training reaction of the type of ambamine appeared; ② C and amba and the Defendant’s ambacy and the Defendant’s ambacy and the Defendant’s ambacy were detected from ambameral disease to F, ③ Defendant’s crime on February 16, 2015, and March 29, 2015, by mixing the fact that the Defendant used the ambalon with the Defendant’s amblopon method as indicated in the facts charged.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The fact that the defendant did not have any history of punishment for the same kind of crime, and that there was no particular criminal history other than the fine imposed in violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. are favorable to the sentencing.

However, the defendant has used and administered philophones over several times, and the crime of this case is committed by using philophones to third parties.