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

Defendant is not a narcotics handler.

On January 2016, the Defendant administered psychotropic drugs, one time, using 0.03 glopon on cans, in the dwelling area of the Defendant located in Gyeongcheon-gun C, the Defendant administered psychotropic drugs, one time by hanging in beer with the cans.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Additional report on a request for appraisal;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report and accompanying documents;

1. Article 60 (1) 2, Article 4 (1) 1, and subparagraph 3 (b) of Article 2 of the Act on the elective Management of Narcotics, Etc. concerning Criminal Facts and the Selection of Punishment;

1. The main sentence of Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act on probation and community service order;

1. The proviso to Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. for Additional Collection (report on the filing of records on price lists on narcotics, etc.);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. The basic area (10 to 2 years) (10 to 2 years) of the sentencing criteria (the scope of recommendation), medication, simple possession, etc.; and

2. According to the decision of sentence, the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, such as the following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, shall be determined, taking into consideration the sentence as ordered.

Unfavorable circumstances: Narcotics crimes cause the degradation of individuals, families, society, and human beings as a whole, and require strict punishment in that they are social phenomena beyond individual criminal acts.

There is a history of criminal punishment against the defendant for the same crime.

The favorable circumstances: The defendant has no same punishment power after around 2003.

The crime of this case is merely a simple medication once.

Defendant acknowledges and reflects crimes.