The judgment below

The part concerning confiscation shall be reversed.

One for injection (No. 4) containing liquids seized: Provided, That this shall not apply to one for injection.

1. The Defendant, who was dissatisfied with the lower judgment on September 11, 2015, filed a lawful appeal against the lower judgment. However, the Defendant did not submit a written reason for appeal within 20 days after being duly notified of the record of trial on November 11, 2015; the petition of appeal does not contain any reason for filing an appeal; and the Defendant did not submit a written reason for filing an appeal to examine the existence of reason for ex officio investigation; however, there was no reason for filing an argument to examine the existence of reason for filing an ex officio investigation; however, there was no reason for the remaining portion of the lower judgment except for

2. The lower court determined ex officio as to the part of the lower judgment regarding confiscation among the judgment below: (a) deemed that the Defendant had possession immediately before the Defendant was arrested and the escape was found within a small-scale wave located in the sewage plant (Evidence No. 3) and that the single-use injection device (Evidence No. 4) containing 11-12, 15-17, 18-1, 84-85 of the evidence record) and the single-use injection device (Evidence No. 4) containing liquids constituted a crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. due to medication and possession of the Defendant’s Mepta (hereinafter “Wilphone”), and sentenced each confiscation pursuant to the main sentence of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act.

However, according to the evidence and records duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant stated that the defendant "one vinyl paper (Evidence No. 2) seized and one disposable injection machine (Evidence No. 4) containing liquid body" at an investigative agency is used by the defendant to administer and possess phiphones at the time and place specified in paragraph 1 of the crime in the judgment below, but only one disposable injection machine (Evidence No. 3) seized are unused clean injection equipment (Evidence No. 31-32, 40-41, 83-86 of the evidence record)" (Evidence No. 31-32, 40-41, 83-86 of the evidence record), and ② an investigative agency shall request the Supreme Prosecutors' Office for the appraisal of narcotics, etc. seized at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office (Evidence No. 2) and one injection machine (Evidence No. 4) containing liquid body from each of the above Supreme Prosecutors' Office.