The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

10,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

1. In full view of the evidence duly submitted by the prosecutor, i.e., the defendant's response to a request for appraisal to the defendant, the statement by the informant D's investigation agency, and the details of cell phone calls, the court below found the defendant to have administered a phiphone as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, but found the defendant not guilty by finding the fact erroneous.

2. Determination

A. On September 4, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. at the Incheon District Court on September 4, 2009, and completed the execution of the sentence at the Chungcheong detention center on December 14, 201, and was not a person handling narcotics.

The Defendant from around June 28, 2012

7. Around December, 197, the Melapop (one philopopon) Melacops (one philopon) was administered once in a non-fluorous manner in the Seoul and the Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter referred to as “Melopon”).

B. The lower court determined as follows: (a) the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion that the facts charged in the instant case were based on the maternity appraisal result; and (b) the Defendant did not have administered phiphones around the time indicated in the facts charged; and (c) the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion that there was no fact that phiphones have been administered; (d) the first day, based on whether the facts charged were specified in the facts charged, from the health class, twice maternity appraisal, and from the call content with C, the date and time

7. To the extent of December 12, 200, the place was the place where the Defendant was located, and the frequency of medication was one time (the first day of trial). Thus, the facts charged were specified. ② Of the evidence submitted by the investigation agency, among the evidence submitted by the investigation agency, the most consistent with the facts charged in the instant case is the reply to a request for appraisal in the No. 6 of the evidence list, the investigation report in the No. 36 of the evidence list (in addition to the report as a result of the appraisal), the informant’s statement in D, and the cell phone phone phone call call details.