All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and eight months.

Nos. 3 through 13 of seized evidence.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. Fact misunderstanding (as to the sale of philophones in the first instance judgment), the Defendant purchased philophones from H, such as the sale of philophones from the second instance judgment, and purchased philophones from D to an investigation agency to conceal the upper line.

There is no fact that philophones were purchased from D, as described in this part of the facts charged, in addition to the fact that philophones were traded in the second part of the judgment.

However, the lower court determined that the Defendant was guilty of this part of the facts charged by misunderstanding the facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court against the Defendant (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and two months, and the second instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for six months) is too unreasonable.

Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio on the grounds for appeal by the defendant, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of each appeal against the judgment of the court of first and 2.

Each of the crimes in the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 against the defendant is in a concurrent crime relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment shall be imposed within the scope of aggravated concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the judgment of the court of first instance that sentenced a separate punishment against the defendant and the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be maintained

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

Judgment on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of Facts

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged (the point of the first instance judgment) was around 16:00 on December 10, 2019, the Defendant issued KRW 600,000 to D, before the C elementary school located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and received approximately KRW 5g of the phiphones contained in the paper bags from D.

Accordingly, the defendant purchased and sold philophones.

B. Determination 1) The Defendant also holds a position in the lower court.