마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the crimes of Articles 1 through 5 in the original judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and the crimes of Articles 6 through 12 in the original judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for 3 years) that the court below made is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. According to the previous record and record on the Defendant’s violation of the Narcotics Control Act, the Defendant was sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment in 2002, two months and three years of imprisonment in 2003, and three years of imprisonment in 2005, one year and six months in 2010, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on October 13, 201, after having been sentenced to one year and six months in 201, and one year and two months in 201 on November 29, 201 (the date the judgment became final and conclusive) on March 12, 2012.
B. The fact that the defendant made a judgment on the crimes of Articles 1 through 5 in the holding of the court below is in violation of depth while making a confession of this part of the crime, and that this part of the crime is in the concurrent relationship between the same crime sentenced on November 29, 201 and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the fact that the equality with the case should be considered at the same time in the concurrent relationship
However, this part of the crime was committed by the Defendant continuously sold 7.2g of phiphones to the same person for about one month in light of the period of the crime, the form of the crime, and the quantity of phiphones, etc., which are very poor in the quality of the crime. The Defendant committed this part of the crime even though he was a repeated crime for which two months have not passed since the completion of the execution of imprisonment for the same kind of crime on October 13, 2010, and even if it was a repeated crime for which two months have not passed since it was a repeated crime, the Defendant committed this part of the crime, and other various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive or circumstance of the crime, means and consequence, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court on this part
C. The fact that the defendant made a judgment on the crime under Articles 6 through 12 of the holding of the court below is in profoundly against the confession of this part of the crime, and the crime of destruction.