마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
The judgment below
Among them, the part of additional collection against the defendant shall be reversed.
1,50,000 won shall be collected from the defendant.
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (the 2018 Highest 872 case: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and imprisonment for 1 year and 6 months) is too unreasonable.
2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant.
According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant 2018 high group 1009 high group 1009 high group 1-A, as stated in the judgment of the court below, administered a penphone once, and the defendant 1-B, C and D of the same criminal facts.
As described in paragraph (1), purchasing approximately 0.24 g of opphones from a person who sells 3.50,000 won, selling 0.08 g of 0.08 to B, and being arrested while carrying the remainder 0.16 g of 0.16 g, and seized (the above 0.16 g of 0.16 g of opphones was entirely consumed for appraisal). The national average price of opphones per time is 10,000 won.
According to the above facts, in the above 2018 Highest 1009, the value to be collected from the Defendant is KRW 200,000 (i.e., KRW 100,000 per time for sale of KRW 0.08g for 100,000). The total amount to be collected in the instant case is KRW 1.5 million (i.e., KRW 314,000, KRW 2018 Highest 872,200,000 KRW 1.2 million).
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which collected KRW 1750,00 from the defendant under the premise that the collection of KRW 450,000 from the defendant should be made in the above 2018 High Order 1009,000, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
In this respect, it is difficult to maintain the collection part of the judgment below.
3. The Defendant’s judgment on the grounds of appeal by the Defendant recognizes both of his mistake and considers the prevention of recurrence.
It seems that the social ties are relatively clear, such as the application of the defendant's boom to the defendant's wife.
It is not good for the financial conditions of the defendant, and the mother of the defendant is receiving medical treatment due to the maternity cancer of the defendant.
In addition, the 2018 High Order 872 case in the decision of the court below became final and conclusive on September 2017.