[2] The case holding that among the facts charged, the facts charged cannot be deemed as having been specified on the grounds that it is difficult to view that it is limited to the subject to adjudication because multiple possibilities of medication are good during the above period specified as the time of medication, and it is difficult to view that it is limited to the subject to adjudication on the following grounds merely because the phrase "within September 2004 and around October 2004" with regard to the time of administration of Mesacam, is highly likely to obstruct the defendant

1. The purport of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, "the statement of facts charged shall be made to specify the facts by specifying the time, date, place, and method of a crime," is to ensure the efficiency and speed of the trial by limiting the object of the trial, and at the same time to facilitate the exercise of the defendant's right to defense by specifying the scope of defense in a manner that facilitates the exercise of the defendant's right to defense. As such, the prosecutor must include specific facts that constitute the elements of a crime so that other facts can be discerned (see Supreme Court Decisions 2000Do3082, Oct. 27, 200; 2005Do7465, Dec. 9, 2005, etc.). The same applies to the statement on the facts charged of a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., the content of which is not a person handling narcotics, etc.

2. Of the judgment below, the facts charged pertaining to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. are as follows: "The defendant put about approximately 0.03 g of Mesa-ca-ca-ca-ca-ca-ca-c-c-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-

3. Therefore, the decision of the court below dismissing a public prosecution on the grounds that the facts charged cannot be deemed to have been specified by the entries in the above facts charged is just and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the specification of the facts charged, and the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jeon Soo-ahn (Presiding Justice)