마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the fact that the Defendant (unfair sentencing) no longer commits narcotics crimes, the lower court’s sentence (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. Since the prosecutor’s statement (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and not guilty part of the judgment of the court below) is highly reliable, according to the E’s statement, the fact that the Defendant provided approximately three g of phiphones to E, such as the facts charged, can be acknowledged.
2. Determination
A. Even if the Defendant’s judgment on the Defendant’s unfair argument of sentencing was considered on the grounds of appeal, the lower court appears to have determined the sentence within a reasonable scope by fully taking account of all circumstances surrounding the sentencing (the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes even if he/she had committed a repeated crime due to the same drug crime) into account.
B. There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances to change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment.
The defendant's assertion that the sentencing of the court below is unfair shall not be accepted.
B. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility in accordance with the spirit of substantial direct deliberation adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the first instance court’s judgment and the first instance court’s method of evaluating credibility was clearly erroneous in the determination of the prosecutor’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, and the first instance court’s evidence.
Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is significantly unfair, the appellate court shall determine the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court.