However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Defendant is not a narcotics handler.

On January 12, 2017, at around 04:00, the Defendant administered a drug in a mutually incompeting practice place located in Seocheon-dong, Busan, using approximately 0.03g g of Mesophical mental medicine, to be delivered to the beer.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (Attachment of an appraisal report on narcotics and calculation of a surcharge);

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc. concerning facts constituting an offense (the choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Orders to observe protection and attend lectures under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. The area subject to mitigation of sentencing guidelines [the scope of recommended punishment] and the area subject to mitigation (the period of six months to one year and six months from the date of imprisonment) (the period of six months to one year and six months) (the number of special sentencing factors) of the types of three (the period of recommendation, the scope of punishment, the simple possession of medication, etc.);

2. As a crime involving narcotics, etc., the sentence of which is determined, is likely to not only evade the body and mind of an individual, but also undermine the health and social safety of the people, the Defendant’s administration of chophonephones without permission is deemed to be minor.

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, the defendant had committed a second offense without being aware of the fact that he had been placed under the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor by committing the same kind of crime.

When considering the fact that the defendant committed the same kind of crime even before that time and has been subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment twice, the defendant continues to repeat the crime even though he is sporadic.

It is inevitable to see.

This case is a crime committed during the period of the suspension of imprisonment with labor for another crime. However, the defendant is going to reflect misunderstanding in depth and not repeat again in the future.

The manufacture, sale, distribution, etc. of philophones had not been involved in the simple medication.

Transfer of Handphones handled.