10,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The additional collection charge shall be equivalent to the above additional collection charge.

The Defendant, who is not a person handling narcotics, is not a person handling narcotics, and is not a person handling narcotics, but a metroopon (one philophone, hereinafter referred to as a "philoopon") is administered as follows.

On July 10, 2016 through July 12, 2016, the Defendant administered a scalopon in an irregular manner at a scalopic scalopon (hereinafter referred to as “scalopon”).

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Seizure records;

1. Each one copy of suspect identification card and Chinese visa;

1. Four copies of the investigation report (attached a customs report), travel search report (one copy of the personal customs office), investigation report (verification report on the status of entry or departure by individual), data on the status of entry or departure by individual (A1 copy), investigation report (in the case of an excursion ship related to the use of a ion cans cans), results of the search of the ion cans;

1. Written response to requests for appraisal;

1. A copy of the relevant part of the appraisal of whether narcotics, etc. using their living samples are taken;

1. A criminal investigation report (Calculation of a surcharge), monthly trend of narcotics (the defendant and his/her defense counsel asserted to the effect that the indictment of this case cannot be deemed to have been specified, and thus, a judgment dismissing a public prosecution should be pronounced. Thus, the purport of the law demanding the specification of the facts charged lies in facilitating the defendant's exercise of his/her right of defense. As such, the facts charged are sufficient if the facts constituting the crime are stated to the extent that it is recognizable from other facts by integrating these elements, and even if the date, time, place, method, etc. of the crime are not specified in the indictment, it does not go against the purport of the law allowing the specification of the facts charged, and it is inevitable to indicate the facts charged in light of the nature of the crime charged, and if it does not interfere with the defendant's exercise of his/her right of defense (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do2694, Jun. 14, 2007; 208Do4854, Jul. 24, 2008).