Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is a evidence that was illegally collected on March 14, 2017 by misunderstanding the facts of the Defendant or misapprehending the legal principles (the fact of arranging the sale and purchase of philopon 3027 Goon 2017 Golop 3027 Golop) by signing and sealing the O’s statement as if the F made it a statement.

The remaining evidence acquired based on such unlawful evidence is also illegal, so it cannot be used as evidence of guilt against the defendant.

Nevertheless, the lower court, based on the illegal evidence, found the Defendant guilty, erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The above-mentioned sentence sentenced by the court below by the prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

Article 308-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "No evidence obtained without due process shall be admitted as evidence" for the determination of the defendant's misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles. However, not only the evidence collected by the investigative agency without following the procedure prescribed by the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act, but also the secondary evidence obtained based on this cannot be admitted as evidence for conviction.

However, in exceptional cases where a violation of the procedures by an investigative agency does not constitute a violation of the substantive contents of due process, and rather, the admissibility of evidence is excluded by the Constitution and the Criminal Litigation Act, establishing a procedural provision on criminal procedure, thereby achieving harmony between the principles of due process and the substantial truth-finding and thereby creating a result contrary to the intent of realizing criminal justice, the court may use such evidence as evidence for conviction.

Therefore, when the court finally determines whether to admit the admissibility of the secondary evidence, all circumstances related to the collection of the primary evidence that did not follow the first procedure;