마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Since the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged in this case, has not administered phiphones, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: (1) around 20:00 on September 1, 201, the Defendant administered the Defendant’s body using the Mesptop scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopics to the Defendant’s body from October 3, 201 to October 10, 201.
B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case by taking account of the evidence as indicated in the lower judgment.
3. Judgment of the court below
A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, the following facts can be acknowledged.
(1) On September 27, 201, D (tentative E) reported that “The Defendant was directly present at the Gyeongnam Provincial Police Agency on September 1, 2011 to administer phiphones.”
(2) A police officer belonging to the Gyeongnam District Police Agency had the Defendant voluntarily intended to receive a defense or hair, but the Defendant refused to do so, and on October 4, 201, the Changwon District Court issued a warrant of search, seizure and verification on the Defendant’s defense, approximately approximately 20cc and approximately 60 c).
(3) On October 10, 201, the police officer belonging to the Gyeongnam Provincial Police Agency was voluntarily produced by the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant refused to collect, and the Defendant was forced to collect and then forced to collect under the warrant of search, seizure and verification issued on October 4, 201, and then the Defendant was below the above defense.