마약류관리에관한법률위반(대마)등
All appeals by the prosecutor and the defendant are dismissed.
1. The judgment of the court in the instant case (the judgment of the court below) was rendered by the Gwangju District Court 2012 Godan492, the court below found the Defendant guilty on the part of the charges against the Defendant, and found the Defendant not guilty on the part of the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (mariju). The prosecutor appealed on the part of the acquittal, which was not appealed by both the prosecutor and the Defendant. In other words, the part
Therefore, the scope of this court's judgment on the judgment of the court of first instance is limited to the violation of the Narcotics Control Act.
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (as to the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court below of first instance), although the defendant was fully aware of the fact that he had possession of marijuana by inserting a reward for reporting narcotics-related crimes into the DNA hospital 511 where he was hospitalized and inserting the hemp in his head, the court below rejected consistent statements, accepted the defendant's change suit without credibility, and acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too heavy when taking into account the various circumstances against the Defendant (as to the lower court’s second instance judgment).
3. Determination
A. (1) The lower court asserts that (i) the following circumstances acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the prosecutor, namely, ① the Defendant was aware of how marijuana occurred, but the Defendant was smelled at the 511 room of the 5th fifth floor of the D Hospital, that is, he was informed of the F Assistant Inspector of the Gwangju Regional Police Agency, where he was aware of the smelling, and that he was smelling, and ② the Defendant visited the said hospital in order to spread down a high-speed line that was hospitalized in the D Hospital, but the Defendant stated that the Defendant was the first side or the second day, and ③ the F was the first day or the second day on August 24, 201. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 23526, Aug. 24, 2011>