The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant: (a) was aware of the medicine that was delivered by K only as a truth control; and (b) was administered with no knowledge of whether the medicine was a crypoid (prophone) as indicated in the facts charged in the instant case; and (c) there was no intention to commit the instant crime.

On the other hand, around October 6, 2017, the Defendant was administered with the control of narcotics in Asan Hospital in Seoul around October 6, 2017, and could have been mixed with philophone ingredients in the control of the hospital.

Nevertheless, the lower judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous due to mistake of the fact.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant admitted the facts charged in the instant case in the investigative agency and the court of the lower court, and there is no reasonable circumstance to suspect the credibility of such confession.

B. According to the fact-finding with respect to the head of the Seoul Asan Hospital, the Seoul Asan Hospital administered Madine (Morhine) and the Pistdineidine (Pistdine) on October 6, 2017 from October 5, 2017 to October 6, 2017, and prescribed that the Defendant administered Madine (Morhine), which is a narcotics-related control, and prescribed the light of the IR codron 5, which is a narcotics-related control, but the control of the narcotics-related control was irrelevant to the Meptian.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is not accepted.

[On the other hand, the defendant submitted a written application to the person on January 16, 2018, the person on January 23, 2018, the person on February 2, 2018, the person on February 23, 2018, and the person on February 23, 2018, and the person on March 9, 2018, was identified as a voice response from the close experiment of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation in relation to the Defendant’s phiphone medication.

“The Defendant’s confession is the only evidence that is unfavorable to the Defendant because the report on the results of the preliminary examination for narcotics, etc. presented as evidence by the lower judgment cannot be adopted as evidence in the legal statement, etc. submitted on the date of the third trial of the first instance.