10,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The above additional collection shall be made to the defendant.

On December 5, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment for a violation of the Narcotics Control Act in the Busan District Court’s Busan District Court’s Branch Branch, and completed the execution of the sentence on September 3, 2015.

The defendant is not a person dealing with narcotics, and is not a person dealing with narcotics, and is prohibited from administering a cropopic (the crophone "copon"; hereinafter referred to as "copon").

around 23:00 on December 25, 2015, the Defendant, at around 25, 2015, was in a “D” Mourbur care room located in Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu Seoul.

E had E administer philophones, which were dilutiond with bio-phones (cipines of injection devices), one time, and approximately 0.05 g of medication to the Defendant’s left arms, and administered philophones.

Summary of Evidence

1. The fourth-time protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant;

1. Statement made by each prosecutor on E (in particular, a statement to the effect that the defendant has been given a phiphones to the defendant with his/her consent);

1. Each appraisal report and telephone call details;

1. Previous convictions: Inquiry into criminal history and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of investigation report (the same type of crime of the suspect);

1. Relevant Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 and Article 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc. for Criminal Facts (referring to receipt of phiphones and provision of medication), and selection of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. Article 48 (1) 1 and (2) of the Criminal Act, the proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act [Ground: Investigation report (Calculation of Additional Imposition Charges), and 100,000 won for medication per phiphone];

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant had mental and physical loss or mental weak mind and body under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act at the time of committing the crime, and that the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weak mind and body under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime. Thus, according to the evidence mentioned above, the Defendant did not have the ability or ability to make a decision on the subject of alcohol at the time of committing the crime.