2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine; 50.

[Criminal Power] On June 4, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to nine months of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the Daegu District Court on October 4, 2008, and completed the execution of the sentence at a wooden Prison on October 4, 2008, and on April 12, 2011, the Daegu District Court sentenced one year of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., and became final and conclusive on July 7, 201.

【Criminal Facts】

Defendant is not a narcotics handler.

On December 14, 2010, the Defendant, at the detention room of the Daegu East-dong Police Station located in Daegu Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, the Defendant: (a) the Defendant: (b) the Defendant sent the Defendant to the Defendant, “D to report and handle what is under the invasion; and (c) put the Defendant’s house,” and (d) the Defendant’s key to the Defendant’s house, and (e) caused D to find out the fact of psychotropic drugs, in the vicinity of the Defendant’s house located in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, the Defendant’s house, and (e) caused D to find out the fact of psychotropic drugs, in the vicinity of the Defendant’s house located in Seo-gu, Daegu-gu, the day.

Accordingly, the defendant delivered a penphone to D.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol regarding D;

1. Statement by the prosecution against C;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Sending a meeting record file;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal records, US records and results of confirmation, current status of personal identification, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each judgment;

1. Article 60 (1) 3, Article 4 (1), and subparagraph 4 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (Selection of Fines) concerning the relevant criminal facts and the selection of punishment on the narcotics, etc.;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. In view of the fact that the reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act Article 334(1) of the provisional payment order is not good, that the defendant has already committed five identical criminal offenses, and that he is disqualified for suspended sentence due to repeated crimes, the defendant should be punished strictly.

However, this case was passed on the second trial date by the defendant.