마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
Each judgment of the court below shall be reversed.
It is about the acceptance of the Defendant’s philopon.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Legal principles 1) The facts charged in the case of 2019No859 are based on an illegal undercover investigation committed by arresting the defendant by communicating the defendant who did not have the criminal intent to possess the above written phone for sale purpose at the time of receipt of the order from the investigative agency to purchase the written phone for the purpose of sale. Furthermore, even in the process of arrest and seizure of the defendant, the summary of the suspected fact, the reason for arrest and the right to appoint counsel are not complied with by notifying the defendant to an investigative agency other than the arrest site, and the criminal investigation is not in compliance with due process. Accordingly, all evidence collected by the investigation that did not comply with the above undercover investigation or due process of law is inadmissible, and the prosecution accordingly is also illegal prosecution. Nevertheless, the first judgment of the court of first instance is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles. 2) The first judgment is erroneous in calculating the additional collection charge without deducting the amount confiscated and collected in accordance with the previous judgment among the phone received by the defendant.
B. Each sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor of the first instance judgment and one year and two months of imprisonment with prison labor of the second instance judgment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Determination 1) Of the facts charged in the case of the 2019No859, the Defendant: (a) received approximately 15 g of opphones from a person who was unable to receive his name (hereinafter “D” or “E”) in the street near the subway station located in Busan Jin-gu, Busan in around 2015; and (b) received 15 g of opphones from the Defendant.
B. The reinforcement evidence of the confession of the defendant in the relevant legal principles can be recognized that the confession of the defendant is not processed, even if the whole or essential part of the crime is not recognized.