The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (the factual error and inappropriate sentencing)

A. Although credibility of testimony by witness E of mistake of mistake exists, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant on the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) due to the sale of phiphones among the facts charged in the instant case

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, 40 hours of probation and order for pharmacologic treatment, confiscation, and collection) is too unjustifiable.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial for a determination of mistake of facts, the conviction shall be based on evidence with probative value, which makes it possible for a judge to have a conviction of the facts charged true beyond a reasonable doubt. Unless such proof is given, the conviction cannot be determined even if there is a doubt of guilt against the defendant.

In addition, in a case where the first instance court rendered a not guilty verdict of the facts charged on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to exclude reasonable doubt after undergoing the examination of evidence, such as witness examination, etc., in view of the fact that the criminal appellate court has the nature as a post-examination even though it is still a part of the trial and the spirit of substantial direct examination as prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Act, it may be probable or doubtful as to the facts partially opposed

Even if it does not reach the extent of sufficiently resolving the reasonable suspicion caused by the first instance trial, such circumstance alone alone does not lead to concluding that there was an error of mistake of facts in the judgment of the first instance court that lack of proof of crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do8610, Apr. 15, 2016). Examining the circumstances described in the lower court’s detailed comparison with the records of this case, the lower court’s judgment is just and acceptable, and the lower court’s error of mistake of facts, as argued by the Prosecutor, is erroneous.