The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no fact that the Defendant, in turn, delivered the Megatopule (hereinafter “philopon”) to F without compensation, and administered the philopon.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one year of imprisonment and one hundred thousand won of collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or in exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is considerably unreasonable considering the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument, the appellate court should not reverse the first instance court’s determination on the grounds that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012; 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012).

Therefore, the court below's determination of guilty of the facts charged of this case is just and acceptable, and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.