2. Determination: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the narcotics imported by the Defendant were discovered at the Incheon Airport and were not distributed in fact at the time; and (c) the Defendant actively cooperated with the investigation by providing the investigation agency with personal information, such as foreign drug sellers (E), L), introductions (J, I), etc.; and (d) I was convicted of a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive, in favor of the Defendant.

However, the Defendant made contact with the seller of narcotics abroad, designated the type and number of the imported narcotics, the purchase price, and the method of receiving international mail, and led the instant crime by themselves, such as remitting the purchase price for narcotics to the seller.

As for the narcotics imported by the Defendant, approximately approximately KRW 25.1g (45 p.m.) and approximately 8.71g of Kenya in MdiM, the amount of which is not specified.

In addition, in the light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime in a state where one year has not passed since he/she was sentenced to suspension of indictment on February 16, 2016 as a crime of violation of the Narcotics Control Act (marijuana), the degree of illegality is heavy.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant's defense counsel requested that B communicate with a foreign drug seller around October 2016, or asked for some amount and kinds of narcotics instead of contact with a foreign drug seller. However, the defendant also did not have any position to ask B to answer the transaction of narcotics or to lead the crime. Around the end of December 2016, there was no little little difference between B and the seller about the kind and price of narcotics ordered by B, and thus, the defendant's sentencing is imposed.