A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

It is contained in seized vinyl.

The punishment of the court below (one year and two months of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection of 100,00 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Even if an ex officio determination prosecutor does not punish confiscation, confiscation or additional collection is a kind of punishment and ex officio, so it is not possible for a prosecutor to declare his/her opinion seeking confiscation.

(See Supreme Court Decision 88Do2211 delivered on February 14, 1989). In addition, the main text of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act provides that “the narcotics, temporary narcotics, facilities, equipment, funds, or means of transport provided for a crime provided for in this Act and the proceeds therefrom shall be confiscated.” As such, the court must, insofar as the requirement is satisfied, confiscate them.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the quantity of philophones (Evidence No. 1) contained in the seized plastic paper (Evidence No. 15) is indicated in the list of seizure (Evidence No. 15) but the quantity of philophones is 0.56 g, but the quantity of philophones still remains 0.22 g, excluding philophones used in appraisal and assessment of plastic paper containing philophones.

(Evidence Records 59 pages, 95 pages). Since it can be recognized that the defendant had possessed as stated in Paragraph 2 of the judgment below, the above seized articles shall be subject to requisite confiscation pursuant to the main sentence of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which omitted the confiscation of the above confiscated article is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles as to confiscation under the main sentence of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act, which affected the conclusion of judgment

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied Reasons for the Judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court.