Attorney in charge C, D

The seized 39.6g (Evidence 1 and remaining excluding the amount consumed for appraisal) of Kenyas 39.6g (Evidence 1, excluding the amount consumed for appraisal), one transparent vinyl package (Evidence 2), 47.2g (Evidence 3 and remaining excluding the amount consumed for appraisal) of X-gu, X-gu, 47.2g (Evidence 3 and 16 (Evidence 4) and five (Evidence 6) of transparent vinyl package used to contain No. 5 of the No. 3 shall be confiscated, respectively.

The defendant is not a person handling narcotics.

On February 3, 2017, at a place where it is impossible to know a place less than Taiwan (TMA) around 154, the Defendant packaged approximately 47.2g and approximately 89.3g of psychotropic drugs (MMA) in vinyl 154, Kenya, and approximately 42.1g and a total of 89.3g, the Defendant boarded Aba E, which starts from Taiwan, and arrived at G in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, around 12:34 on the same day.

Accordingly, the Defendant imported psychotropic drugs.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Records of seizure and photographs of seized articles;

1. Written replys to the results of the appraisal of narcotics, etc.;

1.Investigation Report (Arrest of the Suspect - Emergency Arrest), Investigation Report (to be accompanied by photographs, such as blocks concealed in clothes), Investigation Report (to be accompanied by Kenyas and cellular phone seizures and photographs from the Suspect), Investigation Report (to be accompanied by evidence - Evidence Nos. 10.6g, No. 31.5g(6) and Evidence No. 52.5g(6))

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 58(1)6, 4(1)1, and 2 subparag. 3(b) of the Narcotics Control Act

1. Formal concurrence1);

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Punishments imposed on any violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., concerning Narcotics, etc., on the Import of MIMs with a heavier penalty)

1. Selection of punishment;

Optional of limited imprisonment

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following consideration for the reasons for sentencing):

1. Confiscation2);

The main sentence of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of applicable sentences under Acts: Imprisonment for two years and six months to fifteen years; and

2. Scope of recommended types according to the sentencing criteria; and

[Determination of Type] Manufacturing, etc. of Import and Export of Narcotics (Narcotic drugs, perfumea (b), etc.)

【Special Convicted Person】

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic Field, 4 years to 7 years of imprisonment

3. Determination of sentence: A three-year crime involving narcotics is not easy to detect due to its characteristics, and the risk of recidivism is high, as well as negative impact on the society as a whole due to the cryptability, toxicity, etc. In particular, the crime of smuggling import is highly likely to cause the spread of narcotics and additional crimes resulting therefrom, and the nature of the crime is very heavy. The crime of this case is a case where the Defendant imported drugs of psychotropic spirit, such as MediM and Kenya, into the Republic of Korea, and the amount of psychotropic drugs imported by the Defendant is large quantity. In light of the above, the Defendant’s strict punishment is required.

However, the psychotropic drugs imported by the defendant were seized, and have not been distributed in the actual market.

The Defendant, from the investigative agency to this court, is seriously against the Defendant’s mistake. The Defendant has no record of punishment, as well as criminal punishment for traffic-related crimes. The Defendant’s family and branch members, including the Defendant, are taking advantage of recidivism, and the Defendant’s social ties still remains. Such circumstances are considered as favorable to the Defendant.

In addition, when comprehensively taking into account all the factors of sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, the lower limit of the recommended sentencing criteria (one year of imprisonment) shall be determined to be somewhat excessive and the same type of punishment as the order shall be determined.

Judges in the order of precedence

Judge Kang Dong-hun

2) Since 2.5g (No. 5) of Kenya was consumed in its appraisal, it shall not be separately confiscated.

3) Each crime in the holding is in a mutually competitive relationship, and the sentencing guidelines do not provide a separate processing method for the mutually concurrent crimes, but it is necessary to refer appropriately to the sentencing guidelines for the mutually concurrent crimes, and all of the crimes in the holding are crimes to which the same sentencing guidelines are applied. Therefore, the sentencing guidelines for the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) due to imports of IMs, are examined.