The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On January 1, 2018, the facts charged were not specified. 2) The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine, even though there was no fact that the Defendant sold phiphones to E, as recorded in the facts charged, even though the Defendant did not sell phiphones to E.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (one year and six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. A. A summary of the facts charged on November 1, 2017, the Defendant, around November 201, 2017, traded philophones, was parked before the C Station bus stops located in C Station B at E at E p.m. on Nov. 1, 2017.

2) On January 2018, 2018, the Defendant purchased and sold 0.7g cash 40,000 won in cash, 100,000 won in cash, with a dco-phone 5g-phone 1 million won in cash, which was parked in front of the bus stops in the Seocho-si Station B in the Seocho-si of the Seocho-si, 2018.

B. The judgment of the court below 1 on the non-existence of the facts charged also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the court below rejected the Defendant’s above assertion, on the following grounds: according to this part of the facts charged, the date and time of the crime was set as “the first policeman on January 2, 2018,” and the place of the crime was set as “the inside of the Dcopic vehicle parked in front of the CF bus stops located in Sinh City B at Sin Ice,” and the contents of the facts charged are also specified in the facts charged, and the date and time of the crime may not be clearly specified due to the characteristics of the crime of this case, such as close relation with the Defendant and E, and thus, this part of the facts charged was sufficiently specified

2. The time, place, and method of a crime is stated in the facts charged for the judgment of the political party.