The judgment below

Among them, the acquitted portion shall be reversed on the possession of the Mesphere.

Of the facts charged in the instant case.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. From among the cases of 2019 high-level386 cases, the fact that the Defendant sold a penphone to F is recognized in full view of the fact that F’s statement on the timing and place of the purchase of a penphone and that F’s statement on the point of the purchase of a penphone is mutually consistent. In full view of the testimony of J and I, a witness, the Defendant sold a penphone to F.

Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted each of the charges in this part, it erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B) Comprehensively taking account of the statement of H, the Defendant, along with the Defendant, that he administered phiphones on the day of the instant case, and the statement of K K, which he had been in G hotel with the Defendant, on the day of the instant case, among the instant case involving the phiphones, the fact that the Defendant had administered phiphones as stated in this part of the facts charged. Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misunderstanding the fact and affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the fact, and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. (C) The Defendant was punished for the suspicion of having administered phiphones on the following day of the facts charged that the Defendant had administered phiphones, but was not punished for possession at the time. In full view of the fact that the Defendant possessed phiphones as described in this part of the facts charged

Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted this part of the facts charged, it erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and two months of imprisonment, confiscation, and additional collection are too unhued and thus unfair.

B. The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The lower court’s judgment, among the cases of 2019Kadan386, did not err in or inconsistent with the time when the F, which purchased each penphone from the Defendant, received the penphone from the Defendant.