마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.
2.50,000 won from the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to the sales of narcotics among the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant did not sell narcotics to E, but the lower court convicted him of this part of the facts charged on the grounds of the testimony at the investigation agency and the lower court without credibility. Thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.
B. With respect to the administration of narcotics among the facts charged in the instant case that was erroneous in facts/legal scenarios/dual unjust, the lower court acquitted the Prosecutor of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office of Science Investigation on this part after rejecting the appraisal by the Prosecutor of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of
B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and two months of imprisonment) of the lower court is too uneasable and unfair.
2. Determination
A. In light of the court of first instance’s decision on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and the principle of direct examination, and the evidence duly examined in the court of first instance, there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is considerably unfair considering the result of the first instance court’s examination and the result of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument in the appellate court, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first instance judgment solely on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s decision (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do14409, Feb. 25, 2010). The court of first instance and the witness of the first instance are those under confinement in the same room where the Defendant was detained by the court of first instance and the court of first instance.