The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, issued a phiphone to F and received money from F, but did not have any relationship between the delivery of phiphones and the receipt of money, and thus, the Defendant did not sell phiphones to F.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months, etc. of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court fully recognizes that the Defendant sold F in total amount of KRW 0.34g 60,000,000, in total, to F on three occasions as indicated in the instant facts charged.

① There is a fact that the F, from the investigative agency to the court of the original trial, consistently purchased a total of KRW 600,000,000 from the Defendant in total at the date and place indicated in the facts charged of this case from the investigative agency to the court of the original trial.

The statement made by F is very specific and natural, and the F purchased the philophones from the F's standpoint, even though it was specially provided by the Defendant without compensation.

Since there is no motive to make a false statement, the statement of F in this part F is reliable.

② Even according to the Defendant’s assertion, it is recognized that the Defendant received a total of KRW 600,000 won from F three times each time immediately after the Defendant offered phiphones to F at the date, time, and place indicated in the instant facts charged.

In addition to the cost of philopon, there was money that the Defendant had received separately from F at the time.

Inasmuch as there is no circumstance to see, it is reasonable to see that the above money paid by the Defendant immediately after the Defendant offered F with the phiphones is the purchase price of the phiphones.

③ At the time of the instant case, the Defendant is important in relation to the Defendant F’s employment.