The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (Article 3 of the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the judgment below) 1) The Defendant did not have administered phiphones at the time and place specified in paragraph 3 of the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the judgment below.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty on this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Meanwhile, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the rules of reinforcement of confession, inasmuch as there was no evidence to prove the Defendant’s confession as well as the confessions.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one month of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection KRW 200,00) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, evidence of confessions can only be sufficient if it is recognized that the confession of the defendant is true, not as processed, even if the whole or essential part of the facts constituting the crime is not acceptable, and indirect or circumstantial evidence, not direct evidence, may also serve as evidence. Furthermore, if evidence of confessions and reinforcements are consistent with each other and it is possible to prove the facts of the crime as a whole, it shall be sufficient to establish evidence of guilt (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1191, Jan. 27, 2011). Accordingly, the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below on March 26, 201 (Evidence No. 10th of the evidence record), evidence of seizure (Evidence No. 12 of the evidence record), evidence of the defendant’s investigative agency at the time of urine examination (Evidence No. 21, the record No. 2165, Mar. 25, 2017); evidence and evidence of evidence evidence of the defendant as evidence and evidence of injection 15th of the aforementioned.