The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (fact-finding) is that the Defendant, as a person subject to probation, had an interview with the probation officer each month, was undergoing a drug reaction test in an irregular time, and thus, it was impossible to administer philophones. The Defendant’s urine reaction in the urine prosecutor’s urine test on the Defendant, which led to the Defendant’s suicide with the pain that was hedging with women’s ability at the time, and the Defendant’s urgical pressure and urgical control in Korea with a large quantity of clothes. Thus, the Defendant did not have administered phiphones by himself as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below's decision on the Defendant's assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, namely, ① simple response to Metetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetetes and the second examination conducted on November 4, 2013; ② response to the Defendant's training of Metetetetetetetetes and Metetetetetetesstesstetetetes was caused as a result of a close examination by the Defendant's motion to the National Research and Investigation Agency; ② the Defendant asserted that he was only using Metetetetes and Estestestes from investigative agency to voluntarily submit it; ③ there was no detection of narcotics as a result of the appraisal by the National Research and Investigation Agency on Metetestestestes, but it is difficult to recognize the above criminal facts as a statement.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.