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

Despite the fact that the Defendant is not a narcotics handler, the Defendant handled psychotropic drugs-related Mesofts (hereinafter referred to as “Handphones”) as follows:

1. On July 2019, the Defendant administered a philophone medication in a way of inserting approximately 0.03g of philophonephones delivered from D, which he/she became aware of through “1km,” among the mid-term 20:00 U.S. Btel C around 2019, using “1km” in Eth-si Btel C, for a single-use injection, and dilution them with water.

2. On October 22, 2019, around October 22, 2019, the Defendant administered philophone medication by inserting approximately 0.03g of philophones purchased from an injured party in his/her name in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan E-building F, in a single-use injection instrument and dilution them with water.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. On-site photographs;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to narcotics appraisal certificates and narcotics appraisal certificates;

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Management of Narcotics, etc., concerning the relevant criminal facts and the Selection of Punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Order to attend lectures under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The gravity of a narcotics crime for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act; the defendant's reflects on the defendant; the defendant has no record of the same kind; and other circumstances, character and conduct, etc. of the defendant;