beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.10.19 2018노1386

마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In fact, Defendant 1 did not deliver a written phone to E without compensation (as to the receipt of a written phone), and there was no fact that E mediates the purchase of a written phone from M, and there was no fact that he directly sold a written phone to E (as to the sale of a written phone). 2) The lower court’s punishment (two years of imprisonment) against the illegal Defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant by the Prosecutor is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. On March 26, 2017, the Defendant: (a) delivered approximately 0.56g of a philopon to E, which was parked on the road front of the House of E located in Jin-si, Jin-si, Jin-si on March 26, 2017, and received the summary of the facts charged.

2) The lower court’s judgment: (a) the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court; (b) the E’s statement that corresponds to this part of the facts charged is relatively consistent and concrete from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court; and

In full view of the fact that: (a) it is objectively reasonable and reasonable; (b) it is difficult for E to find out any extraordinary circumstances that enable E to identify the Defendant; (c) the Defendant’s telephone content corresponds to E’s statement; and (d) the Defendant’s electronic depression seized by the Defendant and the Defendant’s hair detection of each penphone component from the Defendant’s hair; and (b) it can be recognized that the Defendant granted E free of charge a phiphone, as described in this part of the facts charged.

The decision was determined.

3) Examining the above judgment of the court below after comparing it with records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts as alleged by the defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

This part of the defendant.