All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of imprisonment (unfair punishment) imposed on the Defendant by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, two years of social service, 80 hours of pharmacologic, 40 hours of attending pharmacologic and additional collection) is unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In the instant facts charged, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. due to the Defendant’s ls from April 26, 2017 to May 2017. However, according to the evidence submitted, the Defendant’s statement that the Defendant purchased ls from the Defendant is highly reliable, and thus, should be recognized as committing an offense related to lsD sales. Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the unfair sentencing of the Defendant. 2) In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the unfair sentencing of the Defendant.

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

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant is not a person handling narcotics, but from April 26, 2017.

5. During the first police officer of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Officetel C, 3 million won was dried from D’s residence, and ls 75, psychotropic drugs, sold LSD to D’s residence.

B. The lower court rendered a not guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged on the grounds delineated below.

In light of the following facts and circumstances admitted by the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the same month from April 26, 2017 to the defendant.

5. The firstman purchased lsD 75 at his domicile.

The phrase "I" is difficult to believe that each of the statements in D's prosecutor's office and the court of the original trial are grounded.

1 D's motive to make a false exaggeration statement ① D's motive to make a false statement on February 7, 2018 was that "it was not concealed and made against A during the investigation process" in the first investigation by the prosecution of this case. It was about ls supplied by A.