The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The finding of guilt in a criminal trial shall be based on evidence with probative value, which makes it possible for a judge to have the truth that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). If there is no such proof, the conviction cannot be determined even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant even if there is no such proof.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2823 Decided August 21, 2001, and Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8675 Decided March 9, 2006, etc.). Furthermore, the cooking and choice of evidence and probative value, which are based on the premise of fact finding, belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court.

(Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, affirmed the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendant on the part of the charges in the instant case (including the charges modified), on the grounds that there is insufficient proof as to the provision of phiphones, the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. from Sale, and the violation of the Narcotics Control Act from the Cannabis, etc. due to the provision of junopon, and the part of the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. from the Cannabis, etc. from April 18, 2015.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is nothing more than misunderstanding the judgment of the court below on the selection and probative value of evidence which belongs to the free judgment of the court of fact-finding, and even if examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the above legal principles and records, the court below did not err in violation of logical and empirical rules and free evaluation of evidence.

On the other hand, the prosecutor is all the judgment below.