The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles on the grounds of appeal, the Defendant did not sell the Metecule (hereinafter referred to as “philopon”) to E.

The Defendant alleged to the same purport in the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles regarding sentencing. The lower court also argued to the same effect. ① E was investigated by the police as a scopon medication, and identified the Defendant in the upper line; ② there are no special circumstances that may move to the route, such as the Defendant’s workplace, I Hospital in H, and D E at latest at night, and there are other special circumstances that can move to the route of the Defendant’s workplace, H, and D E in the event there was no scopon trading, as alleged by the Defendant, at the latest night at the time of two (2).

As can not be seen, the defendant's assertion is not accepted and the facts of the crime related to the purchase and sale of philopon are recognized on the grounds that the defendant's statement that he purchased philopon from the defendant is reliable.

In the trial of a party, the defendant was requested by E to request writingphones, but all refused to request it, and the defendant, who misleads E that the defendant had sealed the investigation agency into the investigation agency, made a false indication of the defendant as the defendant's property and the defendant's property.

The argument is asserted.

However, the following facts and circumstances, which are acknowledged based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below, i.e., ① the E’s statement is consistent, specific, and reliable as determined by the court below, and the Defendant’s statement on the day on which the crime occurred is not consistent with the Defendant’s statement on the day on which the crime was committed, and the Defendant came to a trial on the ground that E was identified as the place where the E was used to trade a philphone, and caused a fraud of a balon, but only the balon tobacco was dead.

“An assertion” may be asserted, but this is a statement to an investigative agency on the first argument from the trial.