Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

20,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Defendant is not a narcotics handler.

1. On November 2017, the Defendant: (a) administered philophones by inserting approximately 0.03g of Mesofts (one philopon; hereinafter “philopon”), which is a primary mental medicine, into a single-use injection machine, and dilution with raw water, on November 201, 2017, the Defendant administered philopon in a way of injecting it into a single-use injection machine; and (b) dilution into a arms.

2. On January 4, 2018, the Defendant, at around 18:00 on January 4, 2018, administered phiphones by inserting approximately 0.03g of philophones into a single-use injection machine at the place of the aforementioned “paragraph 1” in a single-use injection machine, and dilution with aquatic water and injection into arms.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. A response to a request for appraisal, and a narcotics appraisal report;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (calculated an additional collection charge);

1. Relevant Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2, and Article 60 of the Act on the Selection and Management of Narcotics, Etc., concerning facts constituting an offense, the selection of imprisonment for a definite term, and the selection of imprisonment for a definite term;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under the proviso of Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. lies in a favorable sentencing factor, such as: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the depth of the instant crime; (b) the mere medication was made; and (c) the Defendant appears to have endeavored to cease the narcotics by being hospitalized in the D Hospital, etc.; and (d) the Defendant was willing to care for the Defendant, etc., and thus, there exist favorable sentencing factors,

However, the Defendant may not be exempted from punishment by taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the same offense several times, even though having been punished so far; and (b) the narcotics crime is highly harmful to the society as well as himself/herself; and (c) the need for strict punishment.

The above various sentencing factors are the age, family relationship, background leading to the crime, and circumstances after the crime.