However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Although the Defendant was not a narcotics handler, the Defendant treated the narcotics as follows:

1. On December 2016, the Defendant administered philophones at the Nampo-dong 2016, using approximately 0.03 glopon in a single-use popon, which is a local mental medicine, at around 17:00, in the trade name in the Nampo-dong of Busan, and around 17:00, the Defendant administered philophones by means of inserting approximately 0.03 glopon into a single-use popon, which is a local mental medicine (hereinafter “philoopon”). < Amended by Act No. 1403, Dec. 2, 2016>

2. On March 6, 2017, the Defendant, at the restaurant for the Jinhae, administered phiphones by inserting approximately 0.03 g of phiphones into a single-use injection machine at around 19:00 on March 6, 2017, in a way that the Defendant injected phiphones from the toilet for the use of clophones into a single-use injection machine at around 19:00 on March 6, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the record of seizure and the list of seizure, each appraisal report (not later than 8 times a year), investigation report (not later than 15 a year), and the price list of narcotics;

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Selection of and Management of Narcotics, Etc. for Crimes ( punished by imprisonment)

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the observation of protection;

1. The main sentence of Article 67 of the Act on the Management of Confiscated Narcotics, Etc., and Article 48 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The proviso to Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (amended by Act No. 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act / [the scope of the recommended sentence] / the mere possession, etc. of medication and simple possession, etc., the scope of final sentencing due to the aggravation of multiple offenses (one hundred to two years) in the basic area (one hundred to two years) [the person who is subject to special sentencing] (the person who is subject to sentencing] : Within the scope of the above sentence according to the sentencing guidelines from ten months to three years [the decision of sentence]; the person who is sentenced to a fine for the same criminal offense in 2015; on the other hand, Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the fact that the person is two times simple medication