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

Defendant is not a narcotics handler.

1. On December 2016, the Defendant: (a) received and administered Metectop ciles, and the Defendant administered the Mectopphones in the middle of 01:00, on the mid-term 01:00 p.m., Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B4-Sadrotop tower; (b) received one mectopphone from C for a single-use p.m. (hereinafter “philopon”), which is a local mental medicine, and received approximately 0.03gs from C; and (c) administered mectophones by dilutioning the meopphones into their own arms.

2. On December 23, 2016, the Defendant received and administered Metetop cams from the Defendant, at around 03:00 on December 23, 2016, he received one philophones from C, and received philophones from C, and administered philophones in the same manner as Paragraph 1.

3. On January 2, 2017, the Defendant administered 0.01 g of Handphones in the toilet room around the upper 09:00 on January 2, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Court rulings;

1. A written appraisal of each drug;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (related to the calculation of an additional collection charge);

1. Article 60(1)2, Article 4(1)1, and subparagraph 3(b) of Article 2 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. concerning facts constituting an offense

1. Imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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. Protection and observation, taking lectures, and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The proviso to Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. for Additional Collection

1. Consideration of the fact that the crime of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act reflects the reason for the order of provisional payment, the fact that there is no criminal record for the same kind of crime, and the frequency of administered phiphones; and