마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Prosecutor (hereinafter “Defendant A”)’s imprisonment (one year and two months, confiscation, and additional collection) against Defendant A is too unhued and unreasonable.
B. The court below's punishment against the Defendants (the defendant A: imprisonment of one year and two months, confiscation, additional collection, and the defendant C: the crime No. 5 of the crime No. 1 and two of the crime No. 2 of the crime sight table 2 at the time of the original adjudication, the crime No. 5 at the time of the original adjudication and the crime No. 3 through 12 of the crime sight table 2, and the crime No. 5 at the time of the original adjudication are too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. We examine the public prosecutor on Defendant A and the prosecutor on Defendant A’s assertion on unfair sentencing with respect to each of the allegation on unfair sentencing with respect to Defendant A and Defendant A’s assertion.
Defendant
A cooperates with the investigation, and there is no record that the defendant A has been punished in excess of the same crime and the suspension of execution.
Defendant
There are not a few kinds of philophones handled A, and there are many times of transaction, medication, possession, arrangement, delivery and receipt of philophones, and the fact that Defendant A is in possession of philophones and provides other persons with narcotics to administer them, which is highly likely to cause criticism.
In addition, in full view of the various circumstances, including Defendant A’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too minor or unreasonable to the extent that it exceeds the reasonable scope of discretion.
Therefore, the prosecutor and the defendant A’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing is without merit.
B. Defendant C’s cooperation with the investigation is favorable to Defendant C in determining the allegation of unfair sentencing by Defendant C.
Defendant
C has a record of having been punished several times for the same crime, and committed some of the crimes of this case without being aware of the fact that it had been a stay of execution due to the same crime.