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

The defendant is not a person handling narcotics.

On May 2019, the Defendant: (a) put B into a single-use injection device with the Mespopic 0.07g of Mespopic copic 0.07g of Mespopic Mespopic in the vicinity of the Northwest-si, Suwon-si; and (b) injected Mespopic mephone by dilutioning it with the bio-vespopic mecopic mecopic.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the Investigation Report (including Nos. 3, 8, 13 and accompanying documents)

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 60 (1) 2, 4 (1) 1, and 2 subparagraph 3 (b) of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., and Selection of Imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and Article 44-2 of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act;

1. The Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he was sentenced to the suspension of indictment on the suspected charge of medication of phiphones in 2016, on the grounds of the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (100,000 won x one time for medication).

However, the defendant is only a single medication, and the defendant is the first offender, and the crime is properly recognized and reflected in a net manner, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime are considered in a comprehensive manner, and the punishment is determined as ordered by the order, by taking into account various sentencing conditions in the trial process of the case.

(The crime of this case is likely to result from the defendant's addiction, and the risk of recidivism is high, so probation and medical treatment order shall be added to the defendant.