The collection portion against the defendant shall be reversed.

2,200,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

3.2

(2) On June 10, 2012, the Defendant’s assertion that the amount of philopon purchased on June 10, 2012, as stated in paragraph (2) of the facts constituting the lower judgment, is 0.05g is considered only to the extent it supplements the grounds for appeal that the subsequent argument is asserted after

A. We examine the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and consider the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and various conditions of sentencing as shown in arguments, such as the defendant's age, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime and circumstances after the crime, and therefore, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. Ex officio determination: (a) confiscation or collection under Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. is not for the purpose of deprivation of benefits from a criminal act, but rather for the purpose of deprivation of benefits from a criminal act; and (b) there is no benefit from the criminal act.

Even if the value is to be collected, the scope of the additional collection is that the full amount of psychotropic drugs is to be collected within the scope dealt with by the defendant on the basis of the defendant, and the defendant's series of acts dealing with the same drug constitutes separate crimes, and it is not to be collected separately for each act.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do15127, Jan. 26, 2012). The lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the facts constituting the crime of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 1 and the fact of the purchase of textphones as indicated in paragraph 3 of this Article.