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

On May 8, 2018, at around 23:00, the Defendant: (a) stored the Metetop curine dose ( approximately 0.07 g for once medication) in a single-use injection machine, which is a local mental medicine, in the room 703 room located in Busan Northern-gu B; and (b) melted the water into the left arms.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on investigation (calculated additional collection charges);

1. Police seizure records;

1. A written reply to each request for appraisal;

1. Monthly trends in narcotics;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs and seized articles taken by the State;

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc. concerning facts constituting an offense (the choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. An order to attend a course under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act to be confiscated;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. The basic area (referring to six months to one year and six months) of the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended punishment] and the basic area (referring to the items (b), (c) and (c)) of the sentencing criteria (referring to the person subject to special sentencing) for medication;

2. In light of the fact that the determination of the sentence is not only to avoid the body and mind of an individual, it is not easy to detect the case in light of its characteristics, but also to risk recidivism and to have a high negative impact on the society as a whole due to toxicity, etc. among the climatic results, the Defendant’s administration of cliphonephones without permission is not easy to commit a crime.

It seems that the dependence on drugs such as detection of philophones in both the Defendant's urines and hairs seems to be somewhat weak.

There is no doubt as to whether the investigation agency has made a statement about the substantive truth, such as merchant ships, etc.

Defendant has already been punished once for the same kind of crime.

However, the defendant reflects his fault in depth.

The manufacture, distribution, etc. of philophones had not been involved in the simple medication, and the transfer of philophones handled is not much.