마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three months;
2. 50,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.
Punishment of the crime
Defendant is not a narcotics handler.
On January 2014, the Defendant, while searching the Internet site, expressed its intent to purchase the Mesophical amblop (one philopopon; hereinafter “philopon”) that is a local mental medicine, and expressed its intent to purchase the Melopon to F through the Kakao Stockholm.
On April 29, 2014, the Defendant transferred KRW 50,000 to a new bank account in the name of Q used by F from the Saemaul Treasury account of the Defendant, for the purchase price of chophones, from April 29, 2014. On April 30, 2014, the Defendant received approximately 0.3g of chophonephones sent by F to Seoul Mhophones from S located in the Dong-gu, Busan, and on April 30, 2014.
As such, the Defendant traded philophones.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. A copy of the protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the police officer on June 24, 2014 regarding F;
1. Details of transactions of purchasing or depositing phiphones;
1. Currency details;
1. Application of the Kakao Stockholm Act to the content of conversation;
1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc. for Criminal Facts (or selection of imprisonment with prison labor);
1. Reasons for sentencing under the proviso to Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. [the scope of the punishment recommended] trading, referral, etc.: (a) the mitigated area (from August to January 6) of Class 2 (the special mitigation (special mitigation)) (the person subject to suspended sentence for not less than three years) is purchased or received for the purpose of medication and simple possession; (b) the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for not less than six months for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the Seoul Central District Court on April 11, 2013; and (c) the defendant was sentenced to two years for a suspended sentence and on April 19, 2013; and (c) the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case in this case even though the judgment became final and conclusive on April 19, 2013; (c) the fact that he/she led to a confession and reflect of the crime; and (d) the fact that he/she was a purchaser for the use of phone-phone medication as at the appellate court's court and continued to render a final appeal.