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

1. On May 2017, the Defendant taken marijuana in the Defendant’s residence in Mapo-gu Seoul, Mapo-gu and 1506, and even when no person taken marijuana, he/she taken it by drinking it, which contains an influent marijuana.

2. On May 13, 2017, the Defendant: (a) requested the Defendant’s friendship D to send marijuana to the Republic of Korea using the hemp cook, which was prohibited from importing marijuana; and (b) imported the said D to receive the said marijuana in the Defendant’s residence, by requesting the Defendant’s friendship D in the U.S. to send it to the Republic of Korea using the hemp cook; and (c) 458.37gg of the hemp 4 g of the hemp coo in the U.S. California and containing the influor in scoo, scoo, etc., of the Republic of Korea, by using the international distinctive cargo F in the international box on May 13, 2017, after having the Defendant arrive at the Incheon Airport around 10:50 on May 23, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written response to the results of the analysis;

1. Investigation report (verification of the training of the spatched hemps);

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 58 (1) 5 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. under the relevant Act on Criminal Facts (the import of marijuana and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor), Article 3 subparagraph 7 of the same Article (the import of marijuana and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor), Article 61 (1) 4 (a) and Article 3 subparagraph 10 (a) of the Narcotics Control Act (the occupation of smoking marijuana and the selection of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes as provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes within the scope of the sum of the long-term punishments for the crimes of violation of the Narcotics Control Act due to the Import of marijus as stated in the heavier punishment) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing shall be considered in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the defendant, among the crimes committed) of the mitigated amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following sentencing has been repeated in favor of the defendant during the period of suspension of execution):

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc. of Persons obliged to attend lectures;

1. The main sentence of Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Confiscated Narcotics;

1. Collection of narcotics;