특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(향정)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.
The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is to suggest C to the Republic of Korea that C will offer a c and philopon to cover KRW 2,00,000,000,000 in the face value of smuggling imported from China (i.e., one philopon; hereinafter “philopon”). As such, C and philopon were to be sealed into the Republic of Korea.
C, around February 24, 2016, departing from the Chinese short-dong through the Incheon Port on February 25, 2016, and entered approximately 200.49g Handphones from D, which was a ship-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face-to-face on February 27, 2016, and arrived at the Incheon International Airport at around 19:30 of the same day on February 27, 2016 (on-site time).
Accordingly, in collusion with C even if the Defendant is not a person handling narcotics, the Defendant imported approximately 26 million psychotropic drugs, which are psychotropic drugs equivalent to the market price of KRW 26 million, in China, into the Republic of Korea.
The summary of the lower judgment is as follows: (a) there is evidence directly consistent with the facts charged in the instant case; (b) contrary to the content of C’s statement that “If you walk to the Defendant via J (hereinafter “J number”) or K (hereinafter “K”) from the testimony of C, the other party contacted him/her by means of cutting off the phone and sending the phone again; (c) the user of J number and K mobile phone calls without cutting off the phone call; and (d) the mobile phone user first calls C; (b) contrary to the content of C’s statement that “at the time of entry into the Republic of Korea with the Defendant, the Defendant sent the phone number to him/her after sending the phone number to him/her; and (e) on October 28, 2015 and December 23, 2015, the Defendant’s mobile phone number and the Defendant’s mobile phone number are not the Defendant’s primary school and the Defendant’s mobile phone number, who used the Defendant’s cell phone number and the Defendant’s mobile phone number.